For some broadcasters (cough… SVT) the planning for Eurovision 2013 is already under way. A few will wait till 2013 actually dawns before making any serious moves towards the Song Contest (that would be the BBC). We here at ESC Insight suspect that a lot of 2012 delegations are looking back on their campaign to see where they were right and wrong, and to use that to improve next year’s entry.
One bit of analysis that’s been mentioned by many Eurovision sites is the joint survey being conducted by Bulgarian broadcasters BNT, in conjunction with Eurovision-bg.com. Information is key to any analysis, so this is a smart move on their part, but I fear it is misguided.
The only people left who are looking for Eurovision news and commentary online are the hardcore fans. Two weeks after the Song Contest, traffic to many sites (including ESC Insight) is dropping back rapidly to the ‘base’ level that never goes away. There’s also the scope of the questions; “what style of song do you expect from Bulgaria?“, “…which songs have impressed you most in Eurovision between 2005 and 2012?“, and “…arrange the following elements of the song presentation in order of importance (choreography, lighting, camera angles, stage effects, graphics, pyro, etc).”
I think a survey to find out what people think of Bulgaria’s Eurovision campaign is an excellent one, but I worry that so much of it seems to be focused on finding a Eurovision formula, and which Bulgarian songs strayed from this path. My gut feeling is that if BNT, and the rest of the Eurovision delegations, pay incredibly close attention to surveys like this we’ll end up with rather a lot more Kati Wolfs or Joan Frankas entering the contest because they match some mythical methodical approach.
This is all proceeding from a false assumption.
Three previous winners, can you spot any similarities?
There is no magical formula that can predict a winning Eurovision song. It’s simply impossible to find a way to link Lordi with Loreen, Sertab with ‘Satellite’, ‘Wild Dances’ with Molitva, or any other combination of Eurovision winners. Take thirty minutes out and have a listen to the last ten winning songs (with this handy YouTube playlist we’ve thrown together)
Actually that’s not true, there is one link. They are all good songs, that stand on their own, that can easily have a life outside of the Eurovision Song Contest.
Here is the truth about the Eurovision Song Contest that many people forget in all the glitz, glitter, and glamour. It’s a song contest, and good songs win contests. If delegations are looking for a cookie cutter approach to a winning song, they won’t find one. There is no template. The only real answer is to spend time finding a spectacular song that you will be proud of, a song that is simply brilliant, no matter the genre, no matter the name, and with no need to refer back to songs you have previously sent.
Melodifestivalen might be doing something right
The easiest way to do that is to not ask for one good song, or one good singer. It’s to ask for lots of them. Have a submission process that gives you a range of styles to choose from, and then find the best of the best. You want to keep any internal broadcaster bias out of the process as much as possible, and let a similar demographic of voters who vote on Eurovision – ie the general public – help make that decision. That’s why National Finals are so popular, and have a far better success rate than any internal selection process that presents a single artist with two song choices to the public, or even the fait accompli of the entire entry with a ‘we know best, this is the entry’ approach.
I don’t want to knock internal selection too much, it has some benefits, reduced cost to the broadcaster being one of them, the potential guarantee of a star name as your singer (such as Engelbert Humperdinck or Zjelko Joksimovic) being another. But it doesn’t hand you a song that has earned its musical combat spurs. The Eurovision Song Contest is exactly that. A Song Contest, not some sort of examination in who can follow a formula.
I applaud any broadcaster who reaches out to the people who did not vote for their song to find out why they did not follow the song, but that only provides hindsight. Looking forward, there is only one piece of advice that is genuinely useful.
Write a good song, and send it with a good singer.
Let’s all hope that the BBC take note and allow the UK to have a choice again, there are people out there who have the talent and really want to represent the UK at Eurovision. The BBC just have to make sure that we see serious songs in a final and that the jury has the power of 50% of the vote.
Two issues that need to happen, the first is the budget cutbacks (licence fee) effectively cancelled the National Finals for the BBC, so where are you going to get the money? Also if the BBC won’t approach ESC planning till Dec/Jan, you’re not going to get an NF until into early March, which leaves very little time to PR the act around national finals.
We’ve already suggested one approach at ESC Insight (separate Production and Music in the delegation), but I am sure there are others. I think I need to start another list for a follow-up article!
There is always going to be that issue, but the idea you have suggested is probably one of the best ways to go forward with. Even if we do have an internally selected artists but give them a selection of songs for one show then that could be an idea.
Great article, and I’m not just saying that because it’s so similar to the email I sent Bulgaria in response to their survey! I even made the point about the recent winners having nothing in common except excellence.
I’m sure all the internet discussions about why songs do poorly can get confusing to television network management types. We analyze these acts down to the number of feathers in the headdress, and now we’re turning around and saying “oh don’t worry about all that stuff we’re always harping on, just send a really good song”?
Well, yeah, that’s what we’re saying. We’re fans, not music producers. (Well, MOST of us aren’t.)
I think it is important to note, though, that you can’t send just ANY good song … I still maintain that “Euro Neuro” was musically brilliant while still being a terrible choice for Eurovision … and that presentation and performance are an important part of the mix. Everybody has to do a good job, not just the singer and songwriter. Everything that comes out of the TV during those three minutes is being judged.
But you can’t survey your way into how to optimize those three minutes. That has to be the exclusive responsibility of the creatives. They know how to do this. The fans, for the most part, God bless us every one, don’t.
Best chance the BBC has is to break up into BBC England, BBC Scotland, BBC Wales, and BBC Northern Ireland (which already exist) and enter as 4 seperate countries, then try and persuade Isle of Mann to be our answer to San Marino, join us with Ireland and you’ve got 6 countries, which is enough for a block.
Then host some of those preview shows like the scandinavians did, where you show just your songs, to foster some sort of unity between the 6 nations, then unleash them on Stockholm and watch as the best of these 6 get an automatic 60 (5*12) point boost, and the others also get some additional points who make the final (if any) and I assume England would be in the Big 5 still.
Then with 6 delegations, you need to start campaigning for a Western Semi and an Eastern Semi so that equal numbers of both sides go through, add that to the Big 5 + winner to get the 26.
Then target nearby countries as Ireland has, who arent in our block but are near us and award them some friendly points, get them on side so their voters know they get some points from the block every year and will be more inclined to vote for the best song from that block.
Also limit the votes per telephone to stop diasporic voting.
Well nothing was confidential about the Bulgarian survey was it? So, for those who are interested (let’s face it, if you’re reading this in June, of course you are,) Here’s what I sent them:
1. What style of song do you expect from Bulgaria in 2013?
a.) Fast dance pop song;
b.) Ballad with ethnic elements;
c.) Ballad in American / Western European type;
d.) Ballad with rock elements;
f) Rock;
f.) Jazz, soul, alternative;
g.) Fast song with ethnic elements;
h.) Other (please state);
• Answer: H.) Other – It’s quite simple really. To win the contest, Bulgaria needs an up to date, high quality, polished composition that is worthy of becoming a chart hit across Europe. But at least 50% of the song writing team should be Bulgarian. Don’t sell out to Sweden like so many other countries. It is also very important to present it well and sing it loud, clear and of course in tune! There is no specific genre of music that will do this. In my opinion, Bulgaria is not qualifying because most of your entries have been very tacky, out of date, and generally amateur level compositions. However, many of them were performed at a good level.
Big tip – Avoid a song with lots of special vocal effects and computer-affected backing vocals, because otherwise it will sound really empty at ESC compared to the recorded version. (For example – Finland 2009, Waldo’s People!)
Malta 2012 is a very good example of a “professional polish” and finishing touches. Compare the song when it was originally selected, to the final ESC version. The song was the same, but it was a much higher quality composition, and that’s why it qualified.
2. [Open response] Which Bulgarian artist is most well-known or famous to you? What impresses you about their work? Note the artist’s songs that you think are appropriate for „Eurovision“.
• Answer: I am not familiar with any Bulgarian artists outside of the Eurovision Song Contest… but a big famous name is not necessary for Bulgaria’s success. It is the song and performance that means the most.
3. [Open response] Which Bulgarian song has left the most lasting mark in your mind? What impresses you about it?
• Answer: 2007 – “Water.” Elitsa and Stoyan are world-class talents, worthy of their own show in Las Vegas. Their music was not necessarily chart-worthy, but it was cool and different, and it was easy to understand what the song was about, without the English language…. 2008 and 2011 were also very good.
4. [Open response] Specify the best Bulgarian entry that did not qualify to the Eurovision Song Contest final.
• Answer: 2011 – “Na Inat.” The recorded version of this song was a little bit forgettable, the composition needed more professional polishing. But, it was a fairly contemporary radio-friendly song. That means Bulgaria is on the right track! However, Poli Genova was incredible on the Dusseldorf stage. Her very powerful voice, the band setting, the flames, and raindrop background were very effective. Her performance “filled the arena” and reached out through the TV screen. I thought it should have qualified. If the song had one verse and one chorus in English, and the composition was more polished, then it could have done very well.
5. Which language should Bulgarian entries to the Eurovision Song Contest be performed in?
a.) Bulgarian;
b.) English;
c.) Bilingual combination of Bulgarian and English;
d.) Other;
• Answer: c.) Bi-lingual combination of Bulgarian and English. With pop and rock songs, including ballads, I believe it is best to start in the native language, and then for the second verse and second chorus to be in English, because it will “awaken” the viewer who doesn’t understand, and hold their interest after the first chorus. The final part can be in either language, whatever sounds better for the particular song. Remember that there is no “one rule” because every song is different!
Tip: If the singer has a very strong Bulgarian accent while singing in English, it is better not to sing in English at all.
6. [Open response] List any flaws you think affected the song and stage presentation from the list below;
a.) „Lorraine“ (2005);
• Answer: Did not see this.
b.) „Let me cry“ (2006);
• Answer: Did not see this.
c.) „Dj, take me away“ (2008);
• Answer: Very strong presentation, but the music was perhaps a bit “90’s.” Vocals were also a bit weak.
d.) „Illusion“ (2009);
• Answer: This was completely wrong. The voice and music was very unpleasant, and the staging was like a bad, chaotic circus. This was Bulgaria’s worst entry ever.
e.) „Angel si ti / You’re angel“ (2010);
• Answer: Again, very “90’s” with an amateur-level composition in need of a more professional touch.
f.) „Na inat“ (2011);
• Answer: Bulgaria’s best entry after “Water.” This was the most modern, chart-worthy song ever sent by Bulgaria. The performance was very effective and powerful, but the song needed some finishing touches, and a little bit of English.
g.) „Love Unlimited“ (2012);
• Answer: Again, a “90’s” sound with a lack of professional touches. It sounded like a demo for an unfinished song. Sofi sang well, and the “solo” staging was interesting. Sometimes, less is more, so it was a good idea to try it.
It may have qualified if it was mainly in English, maybe with only the final part in Bulgarian.
7. [Open response] Arrange the following elements of the song presentation in order of importance: choreography, vocal performance, lighting, camera angels and stage effects (graphics, pyro effects, etc..). You can add more elements at your own discretion.
• Answer: Quality of song and composition is absolutely the most important element. Next, vocal performance. People don’t vote for a good song when it is sung badly. Next, lighting. This can be the most effective presentation tool. Next, camera angles. Next, stage effects. Next, stage props. This is not always necessary, but a large prop for the performer to stand on and decorate the stage can help to make a performance more memorable than others. Finally, choreography. Choreography is not so important, in my opinon, because a performer should be able to feel their song and deliver it naturally, as long as they make good contact with the cameras!
8. [Open response] Specify up to 5 songs that have impressed you most in „Eurovision“ between 2005 and 2012.
• Answer: In a random order… Bulgaria 2007, Sweden 2012, Switzerland 2009, France 2009 and Slovakia 2012.
9, [Open response] Which performances in „Eurovision“ between the period 2005 to 2012 do you consider as the best in terms of production design and visual presentation?
• Answer:
Sweden 2012 most of all. It was a unique, polished and creative style of performance with excellent lighting and camera angles. People will not forget that performance for a long time.
France 2009 was so beautifully simple, sexy, mysterious and suited the feel and progression of the song. Patricia Kaas’ dancing at the end with the big ‘K’ in the background showed true star qualities.
Ireland 2011 was great because of the very impressive graphics, and the silhouette heads of Jedward also was a nice touch. It looked like the Irish team made the graphics themselves. Adding some of the artist’s own brand helps the audience to remember them. Without that, it can seem anonymous… instead of “Sofi Marinova”, I see a mail-order bride… or to use the words of the British commentators, “the unknown older Kardashian sister.”
Switzerland 2009 was very well presented, again because of the changing stage graphics which helped to show progression in the song. It’s a good idea to choose the best way to focus the presentation. Don’t try to use lighting AND pyros AND costumes AND graphics AND dancers, (like you did with “Illusion.”) Pick and choose wisely.
Bulgaria 2007 was very well presented. Elitsa and Stoyan put on an exciting show by giving the song a very clear theme and playing their drums live. It’s always great when the lighting or the stage graphics change in time with the music.
Note the following additional information for you:
Age: 24
Name: Ben C. Gray
Country: The UK
Musical preferences: My taste is very eclectic. I love electronic music most.. but also rock, some pop, soul, jazz, folk, world, dance/trance, and some hip-hop. I listen to a lot of Japanese and Scandinavian music.
Oh not Ben Gray, the same Ben Gray who humiliated himself on youtube pleading to the bbc after scooch
I think you have a fair point there Ewan that fans might not be the best at advising on Eurovision. However I do think that a lot, but not all, fans do know a thing or two about doing well at Eurovision even if that means putting aside the music they want to see.
I think though that the way to find a winner is to find a song that is excellent for that genre of music. Finding average pop songs or ballads never works because they will sink.
Ciaran – I discussed breaking up the UK before but I think a little internal competition might make BBC more competitive at Eurovision, but I don’t think that it would lead to the creation of another block.
Generally Western countries tend to give 12’s to the same groups of countries. However if the song is poor the votes just won’t happen.
Haven’t read it all – yet! But I agree: The focus should be on the song itself, not the show or glamour. That is was much is about – and what ESC is about. The last years winners have all had quite “pure” visual performances, not all the unnessecary “extras”. Which hints what people want these days I guess.
And:
Yay for a musically diverse, modern and chartworthy ESC! 🙂
Ciaran, yes that was me, and I was very new to Eurovision when I made that video, but I hardly think I humiliated myself. Frankly, if you believe in the cliché of splitting up the UK and having western and eastern semis, then perhaps you should spend some time working out who is really making themselves look silly.
I agree with Ben. Thinking about western and eastern semis is very anti-ESC and anti-European. Moreover, who is supposed to define what is east and what is west? Where should we put countries like Finland, Estonia, Poland or Austria?
Togravus, there is no question what is East and West, of the ones you listed, Austria and Finland are West, Estonia and Poland are East. No one would think otherwise. Only problem would be Israel as it’s not in Europe at all, but as its close to Turkey and has a lot of ussr votes, probably Eastern.
I think the BBC have taken the advice and are thinking Eurovision 2013 already
2 articles https://eurovisiontimes.wordpress.com/2012/06/10/eurovision-2013-uk-goes-back-to-national-final/
https://www.escflashmalta.com/index.php/music-news/international-music-news/item/2032-united-kingdom-bbc-going-back-to-national-final
Both say BBC has told them they have decided to go back to a national final!
Well, togravus, I’d imagine they would define that by the UN’s definition… which is odd because they define Israel as Western Europe last time I checked. But nevertheless, it is going against the ESC’s core idea of uniting Europe – so it’s a moot point.
As for splitting up the UK, everyone else would complain immediately. Doesn’t matter if it’s different divisions of the BBC, it would still be the BBC as a parent company having 4 entries instead of one, which is grossly unfair. Other broadcasters would have to take the helm, and the BBC is not about to give up those rights to such huge ratings for the comparatively low cost. On top of that, I don’t think any of the other consituents would vote highly for England. They’re all too proud. They’d only do it if they loved the song/knew the artist, but culturally and politically, it’s a stupid idea.
You’ll never be able to change the public’s preferences, and neighbours will always vote for each other as long as they continue to send decent entries. When they don’t, then they might get something like 2-5 points. Not even a wealth of neighbours can save Norway from last place if the performance is no good.
The only thing the EBU could do is change the whole presentation so as to put more focus on the songs than the countries, and possibly even get rid of the traditional way of presenting the votes for something more modern. But that would most likely alienate a good 60% of the fans, especially older ones. It can change the public’s perception of how the voting goes, but it won’t change the actual result.
Personally I don’t think anything’s too badly wrong with the voting these days. The juries and public may not agree with the hardcore fans who overthink everything, but that’s life. At the end of the day, your country of origin and your previous fame can help a bit, but your song and performance is what counts more than anything. Eurovision is the ultimate level playing field.
Both articles are single sourcing the Daily Mail. Which says the BBC is *rumoured*. Given the BBC won’t appoint a Head of Delegation till November or December, I would be very surprised if anyone was assigned to make a decision on a National Final.
Ewan not necessarily true, maybe you have more knowledge of this than I but in for the 2009 Contest, the BBC had Andrew lloyd webber signed up, the format agreed and everything sorted by December, for the selection to start early January. I believe it was the 3rd.
I’m not clear when auditions were held exactly, but they must have been held in December, and as ALW was at the auditions he must have been chosen before then, and the fact that they would have had to have given time for people to apply to audition before that, indicates they had everything sorted by mid November at the latest, meaning they must have been talking about it, deciding on it, before hand to organise it all, I’m not sure how long it would take to organise all that, and get ALW to sign up, but presumably more than 2 weeks.
So I think the BBC can actually start quite early. Truth is we don’t know when they start, we are confident that they will participate next year because of the ratings and low cost, but there must be an offiical meeting at some point where they do actually agree their schedule and agree to enter next year and start a plan.
As you say, that was 2009.
Only 3 years ago, I doubt policy has shifted that much in 3 years.
For all we know, the BBC may have started quite early last year, as many have speculated and has been sort of revealed by the press, Engelbert, wasn’t high up on the BBC list and they had to ask many others and go through a lot of rejection before finding someone.
Maybe they did start in November and suffered 3 months of rejections before finally pulling Engy out of retirement.
Ciaran, so Finland is West and Estonia is East although those countries are almost as close culturally as Greece and Cyprus? Doesn’t make sense to me. Sorry!
And Poland f. e. is closer to Germany than most other European countries. Perhaps people in the UK think of Poland as ‘East’ but the Germans think of Poland as ‘Central’. In fact, there are no easy definitions (and definitions like that always necessarily imply cultural imperialism anyway because … who has the right to define for sb else what they are?), there are only zones of cultural contact and transition … unless one feels to be in splendid isolation of course. 😉
Togravus I can draw a map if you wish? Estonia is part of the Baltic 3, whereas Finland is with the Nordics. Poland is definitely Eastern,
Ciaran, well there is history and there is culture, and culture is much more tricky sometimes, intiguing, ambiguous and interesting. Perhaps the map drawn by someone living in Germany, Slovenia, Estonia or BiH would look completely different from the map you draw. Btw, nice that you tell us that Poland is part of the Other (alterity theory …) although people in Germany feel differently. Cities like Poznan, Kraków or Wroclaw feel closer to us than most other European places.
Well, I guess that we better stop it … but I firmly believe that an easy view of the world thinking in categories like ‘we’ and ‘them’ won’t help anyone, neither in ESC nor in the much more important crisis Europe has to survive atm. We are all in this together, be it ESC or globalisation. Celebrate diversity and act as friends!
Funny thing is that everybody I know in the Baltic nations say that their countries are “Northern Europe” It’s funny how we forget that the Northern countries are as culturally different to the Southern countries just as much as west is to east. As long as we have a rough idea of what is what, I don’t think it matters. Ciaran sounds like he’s assembling armies for some sort of 3 minute musical war.
Ben, I like you, take Eurovision a little to seriously.
I’m fed up with being embarrassed, if I was the Prime Minister, I’d have the culture secretary set up a whole department focusing on us to win lol.
I’d even offer a Knighthood to the singer and songwriter if they win it, that should get Gary Barlow’s attention, lord knows he’s been after one for years, heck if he sings it and writes it as well as win, he can be a LORD.
I would make what Azerbaijan spent on their 2010 entry look like cheap change. I would be visiting strange far off eastern lands, meeting their presidents telling them how much we love them in the UK, maybe even get Queenie down she knows how to work a crowd.
I’d force the BBC as well to play our entry more than anyother chart music, as well as making them pay for a decent promotional tour and if I had to buy up ad space in other countries as well.
As for the song, as well as the forementioned knighthood, I;d have a global search and ask people to submit songs.
And if that didnt work, I’d meet with President Putin and President Aliyev and ask them just how much it costs to bribe a jury member or two. Heck, I’m sure even Italy would know a thing or two about that.
Also is it illegal to pay companies in other countries to vote for your act?
and after all that, you think nobody would complain that you, being the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, would be using political force and global power to force your entry to victory? 😉
I admire your spirit, but we have to be realistic. All the Beeb needs is a fantastic song. The artist doesn’t have to be big and famous. I mean, let’s take Loreen. What was she when Euphoria entered Melodifestivalen? A reality TV reject from over 5 years ago with two singles to her name. Imagine if the UK artist was of that level, people would be complaining until the websites crashed! and yet Loreen is now staring a very bright European-wide career in the face because she was a creative perfectionist with a fantastic and current song that she sang live very well.
Point being, basically I don’t really care WHO we send next year, as long as they can sing like a pro. Previous success and fame is nothing but a little re-assurance that they are good and a clue what the song might be like, but other than that it means nothing. If the song itself is brilliant then we’ll do well. Anggun proved that a sh*load of promo doesn’t help much, because she finished bottom five. 95% of televoters who decide the winner of Eurovision are seeing every single act on Saturday night for the very first time, and you have to try and see them from their point of view… but fans listen to songs obsessively and over-analyse running order, live vocal ability, watch all the rehearsals and follow all the build-up for months. You can’t possibly judge the accurate result of Eurovision that way, apart from perhaps a top 3.
Next year, I’m going to note down my first instinct as soon as I hear an entry for the first time, and then see how my opinion of them changes over time, but I’m willing to bet my first gut instinct from months before will be closer to the actual result.
Ben
“Next year, I’m going to note down my first instinct as soon as I hear an entry for the first time”
That’s what I have done every year since I began to listen to the songs before the contest, and I predicted the eventual winner 6 times after having listened to the songs in studio version only once. I only missed Lordi, whom I had in 3rd place behind BiH and Russia, and Loreen, whom I had in 3rd place behind Italy and Serbia.
Lena is another example that you do not need a big name to win ESC. When she entered USfO she was a totally unknown A level student living in Germany’s most boring major city.
On Engelbert: Perhaps you remember that I told the UK fans on ESCToday, who had very high hopes, to expect another bottom 5. The song was not bad but totally wrong for ESC. In fact, except for the OGAE poll (organised fans again, those people who give 1st place to acts like Kati Wolf …), the UK was in last place in every single poll here in Germany, and the reason for that were the song and perhaps Engelbert himself only. It had absoultely nothing to do with the UK as a country. Germans generally like the UK and love British pop music.
togravus
“It had absoultely nothing to do with the UK as a country.”
Oh I wouldn’t say that…! If you listen to the instrumental version of the song, it is actually very British, borderline ethnic. Especially with 2012 being the year of the Olympics in London and the Queen’s Diamond Jubilee, the UK has been plunged into a sea of Union Jacks and patriotism, and when it counts, we can be, at our core, the very country that is romanticised around the world for being all strings, trumpets, tea and red telephone boxes… but that’s one of the things I love about my country. Our mainstream pop music is, in my opinion, FAR less culturally relevant… we’re just trying to copy America but in our own various accents.
I think Engelbert and the song do go together nicely, but for Eurovision, perhaps not. I think Engelbert could have done better with a different song, and I also think the same song could have done better sung by somebody else… perhaps a group.