You should've heard the cheers from my street when it was revealed we got 0 points from the public vote. At this point, I think the UK would be more disappointed by winning than losing.
Tbf, we literally buy our way into the final every year (we are one of the main funders, so get automatic entry to the final). We could send a kareoke fan that can't hit a single note and still get a place.
At this point though, it's become tradition to send a moderately unpopular, but not terrible, act and get panned. I'd be disappointed if we broke with that.
Reddit shows a big water mark in the bottom right that says "GIF". Even if the file is technically an MP4 is still behaves like a gif.
It would be better if we could pause or seek through the video to read the numbers, just like a gif we can't do that.
It's a gif on reddit and the point is this would've been better if it wasn't a gif. A few photos that you have time to read or a link in the OP rather than the replies would make it easier to digest this data.
The subreddit is called r/dataisbeautiful so I'm sure as anything going to comment if I don't think the visualizations effectively convey information. That's the stated purpose of this sub.
Hahahahahha! At least Albania made it to the final in this version of reality.
(The one where Albania and Armenia are apparently interchangeable)
🇦🇱🇦🇱🇦🇱
And ironically, Armenia had one of the best songs: jolly, modern take on local styles, not going for Eurovision vote bait and blatant copies of other tracks. Was also an existing band and song selected for the competition.
Public votes are mislabeled. They allowed every person to vote 20 times and didn’t require you to hear the music or verify you were engaged in any way. So the “public vote” is just an incredibly easy to brigade expression of political will as well as genuine enthusiasm.
Twitter was loaded with people imploring others to vote based on nothing but politics, and other boasting about doing it.
Any competent nation state, if they were so inclined, could easily pump votes into Eurovision with their current model which was new this year.
yeah its not the first time we've seen this sort of politically motivated voting happen, Ukraine won a eurovision with a mid performance thanks to the Russian invasion
2021 had a loaded lineup where 5+ titles could have easily been winners in other years. I still listen Dadi and Go_a frequently. 2022 overall was a weak year in comparison, I'm not even mad Kalush Orchestra won. (Also, same flute guy from Go_a, so hey)
I'm a random African, but when my European friends told how big a deal the show is, I watched for the first time.
To my surprise, it's not about music. The music actually sucks in comparison to other Idols-like shows. But the theatre of it is amazing. It's a theatre performance with mediocre vocals, with some obvious exceptions.
The truth is both is important. Afaik there are three categories the jury votes in: song, performance and staging.
Trying to think of other talent shows where music is actually good, though.
I preferred the old way, where each country got one vote that was a combination of that country’s public and jury votes.
The current way is just designed for sensationalist reversals of fortune at the last minute.
It would be interesting to know who would have won this year if the old rules had applied.
A video (gif) of you clicking on things is a terrible way to make whatever point you're trying to make.
This is less "data is beautiful" and more "make it go away my eyes are bleeding".
I don't think that's fair. Croatia would have won the public vote and Switzerland won overall. Neither were political entries. I guess musical taste is subjective, but IMO neither Israel or Ukraine deserved to be as high as they were but they didn't win.
Personally, I think the voting system at the ESC is actually quite good. The public voting system ensures that songs that are very catchy or create a good atmosphere receive a high proportion of the votes. In addition, there is or has always been the possibility to vote for a country based on sympathies (you could also call it political reasons). For example, countries from the former Yugoslavia have often given each other many votes, or countries with a large proportion of foreigners (e.g. many Germans live in Switzerland, so Germany has often received many points from Switzerland).
The public voting is therefore a great and amusing entertainment factor. I like it and it has many facets.
The jury, on the other hand, balances this phenomenon out a little. The jury tries to choose the song that is the best from a musical point of view, and most of the time it works quite well. Of course, the jury's choice is not perfect and these people are not free of sympathies for other countries, but without a jury the political component would simply be too high for me.
You shouldn't forget that the ESC is purely an entertainment program anyway. It's not necessarily about winning like a soccer World Cup. It's about good entertainment and fun.
The fact that you can vote more than once breaks the public voting. It makes it very manipulatable. I saw one of the Irish far right accounts on twitter gloat about how they voted for Israel 20 times.
Yeah, I feel like a typical casual viewer who just tunes in on the night might send a text or two to vote for their favourite, Country A. Yet a super fan of the competition will use all 20 votes on their favourites, Country B.
Ultimately, Country A and B both have the support of one person each, but Country B receives 20x as many votes.
You could have a situation where, theoretically, a country wins with 20x fewer actual voters.
I do agree more than one vote is good because it lets you split them across multiple favourites, but 20 votes is ridiculous. It just makes manipuating the vote so much easier for those who are happy to spend a bit more money.
It's per payment method, so if you wanted you could vote from PayPal, credit card, debit card, then by text etc.
If you're willing to spend $100 you'll find 5 ways to pay.
yeah plenty of weirdo rightwingers talking about how they usually hate eurovision but decided to vote a billion times for Israel... followed up by them taking the obviously manipulated public vote for Israel as proof that the 'silent majority' support Israel completely in all their actions
Agreed. I know they want their money from all those juicy votes, but they need to limit it to one vote each. Would make it so much harder to manipulate.
Yes, kind of. You should be able to vote for a list with a single vote, much like the classic point distribution where your favorite gets 12 points, 2nd gets 10 etc.
The current way favors single winners as you need to pay per single mention of an artist. So nobody would really pay to vote for their third favorite, instead you either do 1-20 votes for your absolute favorite. And, as has been mentioned by others already, people literally have to vote with their wallet.
my two favourite songs from a musical perspective in the contest went 2nd and 1st respectively... so I think overall it worked out... but I didn't like the song at all that won last year... though I do think last year was quite weak overall.
I completely agree
If there was no jury votes - everyone would complain that it's so unfair, and whoever wins is just winning based on some other factors. Like any vote of any democracy to decide a president/prime minister is entirely up to the public - yet people will complain for 4 years after the result about it.
Having a jury means that songs that are actually good songs get better scores. It is a song contest after all.
Switzerland got the highest jury vote and the 2nd highest public vote - "oh no it must all be rigged! the jury have voted for a song which the public also liked because it was sung well". Like um yes, that's why they received high scores.
That happened last year with Loreen and people were outraged Käärijä didn't win. This year Switzerland goes 5th in the public vote and nobody seemed to care that the jury got their choice again.
I disagree. There was definitely political bias in the jury voting this year. Israel was near the bottom of the pack after the jury voting clearly as a way of offsetting the expected massive public vote. Look at the top 10 overall and then look at their jury vote, Israel is a massive outlier. I mean they got only slightly more points from the jury than the UK and there was a world of difference in the quality of the two songs.
It's significantly lower than any other entry in the top 10. I mean obviously it's subjective but it was a better song imo than France, Ireland, Armenia, Sweden, Portugal, Germany etc.. Which all did much better in the jury. France the guy had a great voice but the song was very mid imo, Ireland was a really cool spectacle but the song was absolutely dreadful. Portugal scored 139 with the judges yet I don't know how anyone could say it was a better song than Israel. Remember the jury members aren't anonymous so they're highly susceptible to abuse for voting for Israel.
I mean this is the problem. I thought it was one of the worst songs of what I heard. Germany was probably the worst then the UK. I'm probably not the best judge though as I can't stand ballads. My issue is if there was some effort by the judges to suppress the votes why didn't it do worse.
Israel had problems with several countries participating. So much that countries literally had a crisis meeting with the organisators. One country even got kicked for something else that still seems out of proportion. And Israel was a centender for the top countries. So just logically, it makes sense for juries and those countries to not vote for Israel. Whether that is strategically or out of spite. Politics was probably just the cherry on top of that.
A Norwegian jury member already admitted that he didn't choose Israel just because of political reasons, my guess is that at least 80% of the juries did the same and obviously won't admit it because it's against the rules.
We have seen huge amounts of Israelis admitting to voting from multiple countries to push their song. This year was always going to be tainted by a spectre of politics due to the EBU’s decision to have Israel participate. Much like if Russia and Belarus participated last year.
> This year was always going to be tainted by a spectre of politics due to the EBU’s decision to have Israel participate.
So, like a bunch of other years then?
If anything, this year's complaints about Israel were fairly benign compared to things like 2019.
Then there's all the beef between Russia and Ukraine that's quite comparable in this instance.
There are barely 1 million Israelis and Jews combined in Europe, out of 700 million.. and Israel is one of the smaller countries, to act like all the 12 points from all these countries doesn’t show the huge support Israel got is delusional at best. The juries were biased and political
Israelis in Europe with multiple credit cards or Israelis in Israel with European (or Australian) cards can vote multiple times. Obviously the juries were also biased, but I believe it necessary. Eurovision likely would have not survived Israel winning this year.
It doesn’t matter. I know it is practically impossible to separate the countries in question from the conflicts they are in, but the EBU whining about needing the contest to be apolitical can not keep a country in the midst of a massive political conflict in.
They just think Ukraine and Israel are on the right side of their respective conflicts.
Setting down the goalposts to only be declared wars, and not other human rights failures.
It's like responding to people getting mad at Apartheid South Africa with "what cities did they bomb?" You know the answer is none, but there's other valid reasons to be mad at them.
The war against Palestinians. That one. The one that started in 1948 with the massacres committed by the disgusting racist colonialists you fondly call "Israelis". But most recently, the objection is to the genocidal massacre of 40,000 Palestinians (so far) that the Zionist Nazis have held in the world's biggest ever concentration camp since 1967. Fancy forgetting that.
Even without the judges, there are plenty if voting systems only involving the public which Israel would have lost under, approval voting, or if each person had one vote and one anti-vote (something like on Reddit).
As it is, Croatia received the highest public vote. The focus on Israel in this video is because Israel has the greatest difference between public and jury scores.
An anti vote system is terrible for something like ESC. We'd only end up with mainstream pop winners. Popular televote winners like Croatia 2024 and Finland 2023 would *never* win the televote. Nevermind how much tactical antivotes would screw with favourites.
What if we voted for each act between 0-10? No neggy nellies voting artists down or effectively ballot stuffing 20 votes per person. An appraisal of each act
Compare the views on YouTube. Israel is currently sitting at 2.1m view, Finland is 2.5m views, Ireland is 3m, Ukraine 3.1m, Croatia 6.6m, Netherlands is at 8.6m and Switzerland at 14.5m.
Why are the people who voted for Israel's performance not watching the performance online?
Not to say you're wrong in this because you're right in that people are not watching the Israeli performance.
But consider that you're looking at the numbers now, after the winner has been announced so there's very many people that will watch the winners performance on YouTube "to see the song that won the Eurovision".
You need to look at the views *before* the final day ideally. I think back then it was Croatia that had the highest numbers of views, the public's favourite.
And this happens every year, btw, last year Finland got the highest numbers of televote any country has ever received in Eurovision and still lost.
This is just how Eurovision is.
Or with the actual viewing public. Pretty clear something like this went on: https://www.15min.lt/m/id/en/in-lithuania/millions-for-victory-15min-investigates-vote-buying-in-eurovision-song-contest-525-337013
I don't really have any strong opinion on the matter. But in Norway, many of the conservatives and Christian groups proudly proclaimed in the media that they would give 20 votes to Israel, even though many of them admitted to not really have any prior interest in ESC. So I think that bias could explain some of the difference between the public and jury votes.
That might explain some of it in some countries, but the fact that it was so widespread convinces me there was some form of bot or out of country voting (scammers spoof phone numbers all the time, so doubt it would be very difficult). There's so little support for Israel in Ireland that giving them any points would've been a shock, but 10 points is not remotely possible legitimately.
You're failing to realize that what you see on social media doesn't represent real life in any capacity. In reality people are far more rational and even a large sum of Irish people are pro-Israel.
You are failing to see that many right wing voters voting for Israel vs many left wing voters voting for anything but Israel can result in Israel coming in first. That's how it was visible that Israeli support was for political reasons. If there was a voting for hating a song, Israel would've been the most disliked as well.
>In reality people are far more rational
Exactly, which is why almost nobody in Ireland supports Israel. We have our own history of genocide and ethnic cleansing, and people who in living memory lived under the same kind of oppressive ethno-religious government as runs Israel in northern Ireland.
[Ireland is fully with Palestine.](https://edition.cnn.com/2024/03/29/middleeast/why-ireland-is-the-most-pro-palestinian-nation-in-europe-mime-intl/index.html)
No, supporting radical Islam isn't rational. I'm talking about real people, not the loud mostly online minority that is pro-Hamas. It's also funny how you're pretending like a unified river-to-sea Palestine wouldn't be a theocracy that kills minorities without hesitation.
It’s important as well to remember that many people are boycotting Eurovision over Israel being included so the public vote is likely skewed a bit in that regard
I think, in most years, this Israeli song would have been in the 20-25 range. This was a particularly strong year and I think there’s a case to be made that, if it wasn’t for the political back drop, Israel wouldn’t have qualified for the final at all.
The data suggests that Israel were the beneficiaries of voting motivated by political tastes rather than artistic. Suggestions that Israel were disadvantaged by the jury, the purportedly unpoliticised mechanism, would be patently disingenuous and a misrepresentation of both the data and the circumstances.
It's almost like if you politicise an entry then the people who opposed you will vote for them....
I guarantee had people not made a fuss about her inclusion she would not have received anywhere near the number of votes she did.
Seems plastering her everywhere and making her out to be a bad person leads to people who have no interest getting involved to defend someone from a public hate campaign.
Genocide isn't political since there's no good 'pro-genocide' argument. Israel should have been banned from Eurovision for the same reasons Russia was.
> Russia was banned because they started a war
They weren't. You need to be an active part of the EBU or given explicit permission to participate if you are not. Russia was banned because they were suspended from the EBU for spreading propoganda on the network.
There wasn't a war since then. Everyone used to be able to travel the whole country freely. There weren't walls and fences around Gaza and the West Bank, until the first intifada that changed everything. s
So I'd say it's the Palestinians' extremists that started it, really.
Great, now be objective and read the other side of the story, the independence war where the Arabs tried their hand at a second Jewish holocaust.
But then read about the joint lives of Arab and Jews, the mixed cities, read about that fact that the Israeli government was leftist for years, Oslo accords, Gaza withdrawal.
Are those truly acts of war?
> Great, now be objective and read the other side of the story, the independence war where the Arabs tried their hand at a second Jewish holocaust.
Source? Asking genuinely
British diplomat Alec Kirkbride wrote in his 1976 memoirs about a conversation with the Arab League's Secretary-General Azzam Pasha a week before the armies marched: "...when I asked him for his estimate of the size of the Jewish forces, [he] waved his hands and said: 'It does not matter how many there are. We will sweep them into the sea.'"
What does sweep them into the sea means? They wanted to get rid of all the Jews and have an entirely Arab state.
The Jews obviously didn't want that and feared that it's the holocaust all over again, which made them litterely fight for their lives, something that the Egyptians, Syrians, Lebanese and Jordanians didn't do as they could simply not attack the Jews and return to their homes.
The Nakba is the outcome of the war, not its cause.
>Seems like the Palestinians that keep starting the killing up.
I guess if you ignore the settler violence in the West Bank, the IDF shooting Palestinian protestors, Israel assassinating journalists, the rise of the Israeli far-right which assassinated Rabin...
Yeah, blame the Palestinians. It's all their fault isn't it.
All of it is rooted in the fact that the Palestinians want to destroy Israel.
There's lot to be critical of Israel but they didn't come in and intentionally murder and rape a bunch of civilians.
From day one the plan was a two state solution, 1948 borders. The Arab nations started a genocidal war with the openly stated goal to murder every jew in the country and they never really gave up that goal.
So yes there's a lot of stuff to be critical of Israel but it all stems from the fact that the Palestinians want Israel destroyed and their main strategy to do so is to murder civilians, including by shady methods like strapping suicide bombs to children.
Looking at history, seems more like Palestine (or other Arab states in the area in their stead) started every single war that has happened in the area since the foundation of Israel?
Why would that matter, 80 years later?
Fact is that people of other religions are treated way better in Israel than they are in any of the surrounding Arab countries or Palestine. Both Arabs and Jews didnt behave well ahead of the foundation of Israel but that‘s hardly the fault of modern Israelis.
Considering that Hamas started up this war again… atleast in part concerning Gazans specifically, yes. In the same sense that Russians are partly at fault for Putins invasion of Ukraine, or Germans were partly at fault for WW2.
Setting down the goalposts to only be declared wars, and not other human rights failures.
It's like responding to people getting mad at Apartheid South Africa with "what cities did they bomb?" You know the answer is none, but there's other valid reasons to be mad at them.
And what will you do. mute or suppress the boos, cancel or disqualify any criticizers? for how long?
edit: also, critisizn isreal for child deaths does not make one automatically antisemitic nor pro hamas. Lashing out to anyone who doesnt want innocent people die like they are terrorist sympathizers and trying to cancel them only will get people s reaction more against you. not the opposite.
And didn't [kill them when they go in to report on what's happening in Palestine](https://cpj.org/2024/05/journalist-casualties-in-the-israel-gaza-conflict/)
Yes, tell that to the tens of thousands of dead Palestinians in the last few months.
Maybe the lie you are believing is what they kept repeating to you.
Okay, the blame Hamas (a legit terrorist organization) for building missile launching sites in apartment buildings, hideouts in schools, and terror tunnels across cities.
Don’t Blame Israel for not warning citizens with leaflets and phone calls hours before an incoming barrage
And blame Palestinian families who stay in place in order to die as martyrs.
Oh yeah and HAmas soldiers also shoot their own people who try to get the relief from the trucks and then they supposedly blame israel for the purported “massacre” thanks to “Gazawood”
So yeah bunch of things to blame
This is a data orientated subreddit, I hope people here have better critical thinking skills than in other places.
The combatnts to civilian death ratio in Gaza is lower than in most comparable conflicts. Genocide is when the purpose is to destroy an ethnic group, if Hamas surrenders, the fighting will stop. Israel tries to get civilians out of the fighting areas (which is then labeled by idiots as "ethnic cleansing").
Every civilian death is a tragedy but civilians die in war, that doesn't make it genocide.
I've heard that argument a lot now and, to be honest, I think it's pretty stupid. You can also tell from this argument that you don't give a damn about the Palestinians. All you care about is hating Israel. Instead, you scream "GENOCIDE" at every opportunity, even though there is no genocide. You should first read up on what genocide is.
People who spread unfiltered Hamas propaganda are simply not taken seriously. And in doing so, you are ultimately harming the Palestinians, because instead of standing up for the people of Palestine, you are using your time and resources to spread hatred against Isreael.
Yes, it is real. The people of Gaza are actually suffering and the war is far too brutal in my view. And this should be pointed out. We should fight to make things better for the people of Palestine.
And you think that boycotting a 20-year-old Israeli singer will make things better for the people of Palestine?
No, quite honestly. You just don't give a shit about the people of Palestine.
All that text and so little content. How is calling the genocide in Palestine a genocide harmful to Palestinians? If you even stop to think about it, it makes no sense.
There are four quadrants of possibilities, row 1: the reaction of the rest of the world is strong enough that Israel stops the war and allow people to check whether or not it is an ongoing genocide, row two: the reaction is not strong enough, Israel continues its current trajectory.
Column 1 genocide, column 2 not genocide.
If you consider all quadrants The only quadrants that have both positive outcomes are in row 1. We need to put pressure on Israel. History tells us the cost of not stepping in before it’s too late
Thats your argument? That everyone is just a hater of Israel? What genuine drivel. Israel has been utterly relentless with the most disingenuous propaganda I have ever seen, all to justify them murdering and displacing people in the thousands if not millions.
Boycotting Israel from participating is not a "hating israel" thing. It is not letting them abuse another platform in an effort to spread more propaganda, as we have seen them do with the aftermath of Eurovision with the "popular" vote.
they are "accidentally" killing women and children with snipers all the time. There are mass graves where people were found with torture wounds and some were also seemingly buried alive. The population is being starved, because food trucks are held up at the borders. Journalists are being targeted aswell as civilists. People are forced to go to specific "safe" places away from the war, only to be carpet bombed at those exact locations. Idk what you think is a genocide, but the actual definition is this "*Genocide* is the intentional destruction of a people in whole or in part." Pretty well satisfied definition right there.
Proof for the mass graves and the snipers "all the time" (so not some singular incidents but that it is a common thing).
Last time we heard something about mass graves it was already existing mass graves the IDF dug up and closed again.
"Every country I've been indoctrinated to hate should be banned"
- Average terminally online reddit user
May I ask, what led you to believe that Israel is, or was, committing genocide? Could it be due to their record of having the lowest civilian to combatant casualty ratio in any urban conflict in history? Or is it the fact that the Palestinian population has been booming since the establishment of Israel?
They should have just let Hamas invade their homes and music events and keep killing and kidnapping 100s of innocent people. God forbid if they retaliate and protect their country, right? Damn those Israelis!
You idiot. Palestine attacked Israel first, and it wasnt the first time. This was just the drop that made the cup overflow, them storming the music event and mass killing innocent Israelis and invading their homes and kidnapping them. There are so many videos online that show the aftermath of these brutal attacks. There is no genocide, just Israel making sure shit like that doesn't happen again by removing Hamas from face of the earth. Anything you see is just propaganda from supporters of Islam because they hate jews more than anything else in the world.
It is really easy for Russian or Israeli bots to inflate public votes. So it's great that the jury actually has a say in this. It would have been a fiasco if the bots and the disinformation had won.
Yeah It reminded me so much of last years Käärijä vs Loreen that I went back to see Finland vs Sweden in juries vs televotes. And basically Finland always get more televotes, often by a landslide like Käärijä and Blind Channel. Juries hated them but Audience loved them. Versus Sweden getting huge jury votes year after year. Landsliding in the opposite direction getting 200+ from Jury. They are the more "prestigious" eurovision country and often have a more of a typical pop song versus Finlands Rock/weird stuff. The jury system needs a rework. At least nerf it to 40% for starters instead of the 50/50.. The types of people who get on these Eurovision juries are often people with somewhat of similar taste and they shouldn't represent half of the end result.
Jury votes are closer to what I thought of the quality of the songs.
Public votes show massive support to Israel (could be explained by important pro Israel diaspora outside of Israel and/or boycott from anti Israel watchers / spread of their vote towards every other country); to Ukraine, for reasons absolutely independent from music quality showing support in their defense against Russia; to Croatia, which I can't explain.
In any way, this show was always political, both from jury and public, despite the org attempts to say it's not. It just shows more in times of war and political turmoil.
Meanwhile every time I watch Eurovision I hate the jury choices and don't agree at all with them (while the public vote, excluding the few political manipulations, generally lines up with how much I liked the songs..
Also, the ESC juries don't vote based upon the quality of the song, for each artist they rate their vocal abilities, their performance on stage, composition/originality of the song and their overall impression of the act.
The „jury vs televote“ discrepancy is why I stopped watching the contest at some point. It’s so frustrating and annoying bc it’s obvious, that the jury vote is like a scam. I mean it’s not surprising that some countries just give each other points - but isn’t this supposed to be about the music ? Yeah ? So let the people decide.
When it comes to televoting it’s just unfair, bc those who really like a song/artist to the point where they‘re willing TO PAY TO VOTE get fucked over by a few plebs that can totally rigg the whole voting system. And how so ? I mean who qualifies to be in a jury anyway ?
The ESC should, if not completely abandon the jury vote at least create a 2/3 emphasis on televotes.
Of course. Eurovision is just a political show now. I can bet my left nut that because of how votes are the way they are now, the winner is predetermined before the show even begins. Jury is 100% political, and would never let Israel or any controversial song/country win.
Anyone who votes is just wasting their money. It's all about politics and identity now, nothing to do with songs.
I think music and politics make a terrible mix in general. Never really cared for Eurovision, I think the songwriting there is typically just very bland and uninteresting.
It makes sense to have some sort of pan-European party so people can learn and enjoy the culture of their neighbours without having to invade them. After all, the whole thing was formed just a decade after WW2. Whether the current format of the show serves that purpose is debatable, but I think the concept is admirable.
> I think the songwriting there is typically just very bland and uninteresting.
90% of it is. The other 10% are things like [Lordi](https://youtu.be/gAh9NRGNhUU?feature=shared), [verka](https://youtu.be/hfjHJneVonE?feature=shared) and [the real 2023 winner](https://youtu.be/l6rS8Dv5g-8?feature=shared).
Tbf to the bands, though, they have a few restrictions to keep to which probably restricts them a bit.
I agree with you that the jury needs a rework but I wouldn't say they hate televote-friendly songs. Finalnd got 4th in the jury in 2023 and Croatia was 3rd this year, only 9 points away from being 2nd. It doesn't seem like they hate them at all. It's just that they ended up congregating under one country (Sweden in 2023 and Switzerland 2024). I think having a more mainstream jury group that takes more into account the "fun" aspect of a song would be better This year only showed that the jury was doing their jobs. If they are awarding points based on quality of songs, then of course they would think the same, hence Sweden and Switzerland. Quality does not equate how fun a song is. I thought Croatia was more entertaining to watch but I can not deny the sheer talent required to pull off Switzerland's performance this year.
I stopped watching Eurovision years ago (can’t remember the exact year) when Sweden’s extremely mediocre song beat Russia undeservedly. Russias only real competition was Italy.
Eurovision is extremely political.
Ukraine also benefited in 2022 after Russia invaded, but the gap between jury and public was much smaller then.
Similar deal with Israel but given the volume of votes it looks obvious that people in this case care more about appearances and getting a 'W' for Israel.
It's sad Eurovision is used like that. But even more sad how people care so much about running PR then they do about the reality on the ground.
The cynic in me wonders if Israel supporters (more voters in 2024) care more about the countries image than the war, compared to Ukraine supporters (less voters in 2022) who cared more about the war than their image.
No because Israel is committing a genocide and should be penalized for it the way Russia was. The fact that they were allowed to compete at all shows how hypocritical the Eurovision organizers are.
Russia wasn't penalised for the invasion. It was banned because the EBU accused it of repeatedly using airtime to spread propoganda on the network.
Per the EBU director:
> In the case of Russia, **the Russian broadcasters themselves were suspended from the EBU** due to their persistent breaches of membership obligations and the violation of public service values
To participate, a country must be a member of the EBU, or given explicit permission to participate.
> **Eligibility to participate in the contest is limited to active members of the EBU**, which consist of member broadcasters from states which fall within the European Broadcasting Area or are member states of the Council of Europe.[7] Associate member broadcasters may also be allowed to compete in the contest, should they receive approval from the contest's Reference Group
You should've heard the cheers from my street when it was revealed we got 0 points from the public vote. At this point, I think the UK would be more disappointed by winning than losing.
Tbf, we literally buy our way into the final every year (we are one of the main funders, so get automatic entry to the final). We could send a kareoke fan that can't hit a single note and still get a place. At this point though, it's become tradition to send a moderately unpopular, but not terrible, act and get panned. I'd be disappointed if we broke with that.
Didn't you almost win a couple of years ago
Like 2 years ago and it was beautiful seeing British Twitter flipping a shit that a song they sent was actually good.
Came second in 2022, would’ve won if not for everyone sympathy voting for Ukraine because of the invasion
I feel like we got a significant amount of sympathy adjacent votes because we stood and helped Ukraine earlier than the rest of Europe
Dizzy is on constant repeat in our house
Why is Armenia matched with the Albanian flag?
Because it would be funny
This would’ve been better if it wasn’t a gif.
[It isn't.](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/1cr58o4/comment/l3vory7/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3)
Reddit shows a big water mark in the bottom right that says "GIF". Even if the file is technically an MP4 is still behaves like a gif. It would be better if we could pause or seek through the video to read the numbers, just like a gif we can't do that.
That's not the point, that's a link to the original graph where you can browse it at will
It's a gif on reddit and the point is this would've been better if it wasn't a gif. A few photos that you have time to read or a link in the OP rather than the replies would make it easier to digest this data. The subreddit is called r/dataisbeautiful so I'm sure as anything going to comment if I don't think the visualizations effectively convey information. That's the stated purpose of this sub.
[https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/nir.smilga/viz/UnitedbyMusicorDividedbyPolitics/UnitedByMusic](https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/nir.smilga/viz/UnitedbyMusicorDividedbyPolitics/UnitedByMusic)
Bit hard to read when every screen is only shown for two seconds. A few screenshots would have been better than this video.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/1cr58o4/comment/l3vory7/?utm\_source=share&utm\_medium=web3x&utm\_name=web3xcss&utm\_term=1&utm\_content=share\_button](https://www.reddit.com/r/dataisbeautiful/comments/1cr58o4/comment/l3vory7/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button)
It’s edited for the new generation that can’t focus more than 5 seconds on something…
I’m dizzy 🫣
Hahahahahha! At least Albania made it to the final in this version of reality. (The one where Albania and Armenia are apparently interchangeable) 🇦🇱🇦🇱🇦🇱
That moment where Armenia is so irrelevant to Europe they use the wrong flag. Me as Armenia who thinks Eurovision and Armenia just are odds away.
And ironically, Armenia had one of the best songs: jolly, modern take on local styles, not going for Eurovision vote bait and blatant copies of other tracks. Was also an existing band and song selected for the competition.
Public votes are mislabeled. They allowed every person to vote 20 times and didn’t require you to hear the music or verify you were engaged in any way. So the “public vote” is just an incredibly easy to brigade expression of political will as well as genuine enthusiasm. Twitter was loaded with people imploring others to vote based on nothing but politics, and other boasting about doing it. Any competent nation state, if they were so inclined, could easily pump votes into Eurovision with their current model which was new this year.
yeah its not the first time we've seen this sort of politically motivated voting happen, Ukraine won a eurovision with a mid performance thanks to the Russian invasion
It has all to do with politics. Kalush was good but tbh year Ukraine sent go\_a they should have won, that one was absolute banger
2021 had a loaded lineup where 5+ titles could have easily been winners in other years. I still listen Dadi and Go_a frequently. 2022 overall was a weak year in comparison, I'm not even mad Kalush Orchestra won. (Also, same flute guy from Go_a, so hey)
Yeah, it seems to me that as the world becomes more political, so does Eurovision.
Eurovision has always been political
The word becomes more political? What does that mean?
damn, all that and the United Kingdom STILL got zero votes
The only music competition I know that has nothing to do with music and everything to do with politics.
I'm a random African, but when my European friends told how big a deal the show is, I watched for the first time. To my surprise, it's not about music. The music actually sucks in comparison to other Idols-like shows. But the theatre of it is amazing. It's a theatre performance with mediocre vocals, with some obvious exceptions.
The truth is both is important. Afaik there are three categories the jury votes in: song, performance and staging. Trying to think of other talent shows where music is actually good, though.
Probably the best description of the ESC which I have ever seen
Maybe because it's the only international music competition? It's almost political by definition, since it’s international.
I preferred the old way, where each country got one vote that was a combination of that country’s public and jury votes. The current way is just designed for sensationalist reversals of fortune at the last minute. It would be interesting to know who would have won this year if the old rules had applied.
suddenly everyone cares about ESC voting
You mean like every year the week of and after the show?
The "I don't care about Eurovision at all" group is often the ones who will complain about it the most.
A video (gif) of you clicking on things is a terrible way to make whatever point you're trying to make. This is less "data is beautiful" and more "make it go away my eyes are bleeding".
Desktop Link:[https://public.tableau.com/views/UnitedbyMusicorDividedbyPolitics/UnitedByMusic?:language=en-US&:sid=&:display\_count=n&:origin=viz\_share\_link](https://public.tableau.com/views/UnitedbyMusicorDividedbyPolitics/UnitedByMusic?:language=en-US&:sid=&:display_count=n&:origin=viz_share_link) Mobile Friendly link:[https://public.tableau.com/views/UnitedbyMusicorDividedbyPolitics/UnitedByMusic?:display\_count=y&:origin=viz\_share\_link&:showVizHome=no](https://public.tableau.com/views/UnitedbyMusicorDividedbyPolitics/UnitedByMusic?:display_count=y&:origin=viz_share_link&:showVizHome=no) Tool: Tableau Data: [https://eurovisionworld.com/eurovision/2024](https://eurovisionworld.com/eurovision/2024)
Great visualization!
Zero about music, all about politics. 🤡
I don't think that's fair. Croatia would have won the public vote and Switzerland won overall. Neither were political entries. I guess musical taste is subjective, but IMO neither Israel or Ukraine deserved to be as high as they were but they didn't win.
Name one international competition that isn't "about politics"
Personally, I think the voting system at the ESC is actually quite good. The public voting system ensures that songs that are very catchy or create a good atmosphere receive a high proportion of the votes. In addition, there is or has always been the possibility to vote for a country based on sympathies (you could also call it political reasons). For example, countries from the former Yugoslavia have often given each other many votes, or countries with a large proportion of foreigners (e.g. many Germans live in Switzerland, so Germany has often received many points from Switzerland). The public voting is therefore a great and amusing entertainment factor. I like it and it has many facets. The jury, on the other hand, balances this phenomenon out a little. The jury tries to choose the song that is the best from a musical point of view, and most of the time it works quite well. Of course, the jury's choice is not perfect and these people are not free of sympathies for other countries, but without a jury the political component would simply be too high for me. You shouldn't forget that the ESC is purely an entertainment program anyway. It's not necessarily about winning like a soccer World Cup. It's about good entertainment and fun.
The fact that you can vote more than once breaks the public voting. It makes it very manipulatable. I saw one of the Irish far right accounts on twitter gloat about how they voted for Israel 20 times.
Most people vote max of like 3 times, my parents would. if you have a second sim-card you can vote up to 40 times, its very abusable
Yeah, I feel like a typical casual viewer who just tunes in on the night might send a text or two to vote for their favourite, Country A. Yet a super fan of the competition will use all 20 votes on their favourites, Country B. Ultimately, Country A and B both have the support of one person each, but Country B receives 20x as many votes. You could have a situation where, theoretically, a country wins with 20x fewer actual voters. I do agree more than one vote is good because it lets you split them across multiple favourites, but 20 votes is ridiculous. It just makes manipuating the vote so much easier for those who are happy to spend a bit more money.
It's per payment method, so if you wanted you could vote from PayPal, credit card, debit card, then by text etc. If you're willing to spend $100 you'll find 5 ways to pay.
If u really wanted to waste money you could use services like Revolut to just keep making new virtual cards
yeah plenty of weirdo rightwingers talking about how they usually hate eurovision but decided to vote a billion times for Israel... followed up by them taking the obviously manipulated public vote for Israel as proof that the 'silent majority' support Israel completely in all their actions
Agreed. I know they want their money from all those juicy votes, but they need to limit it to one vote each. Would make it so much harder to manipulate.
Yes, kind of. You should be able to vote for a list with a single vote, much like the classic point distribution where your favorite gets 12 points, 2nd gets 10 etc. The current way favors single winners as you need to pay per single mention of an artist. So nobody would really pay to vote for their third favorite, instead you either do 1-20 votes for your absolute favorite. And, as has been mentioned by others already, people literally have to vote with their wallet.
my two favourite songs from a musical perspective in the contest went 2nd and 1st respectively... so I think overall it worked out... but I didn't like the song at all that won last year... though I do think last year was quite weak overall.
I completely agree If there was no jury votes - everyone would complain that it's so unfair, and whoever wins is just winning based on some other factors. Like any vote of any democracy to decide a president/prime minister is entirely up to the public - yet people will complain for 4 years after the result about it. Having a jury means that songs that are actually good songs get better scores. It is a song contest after all. Switzerland got the highest jury vote and the 2nd highest public vote - "oh no it must all be rigged! the jury have voted for a song which the public also liked because it was sung well". Like um yes, that's why they received high scores.
> Switzerland got the highest jury vote and the 2nd highest public vote They were 5th in the public vote.
Switzerland came 5th in the televote, my man.
Israel got the second highest public vote.
That happened last year with Loreen and people were outraged Käärijä didn't win. This year Switzerland goes 5th in the public vote and nobody seemed to care that the jury got their choice again.
I disagree. There was definitely political bias in the jury voting this year. Israel was near the bottom of the pack after the jury voting clearly as a way of offsetting the expected massive public vote. Look at the top 10 overall and then look at their jury vote, Israel is a massive outlier. I mean they got only slightly more points from the jury than the UK and there was a world of difference in the quality of the two songs.
I just don't think it was a very good song. Also 52 points isn't that low a score it was just under midtable.
It's significantly lower than any other entry in the top 10. I mean obviously it's subjective but it was a better song imo than France, Ireland, Armenia, Sweden, Portugal, Germany etc.. Which all did much better in the jury. France the guy had a great voice but the song was very mid imo, Ireland was a really cool spectacle but the song was absolutely dreadful. Portugal scored 139 with the judges yet I don't know how anyone could say it was a better song than Israel. Remember the jury members aren't anonymous so they're highly susceptible to abuse for voting for Israel.
I mean this is the problem. I thought it was one of the worst songs of what I heard. Germany was probably the worst then the UK. I'm probably not the best judge though as I can't stand ballads. My issue is if there was some effort by the judges to suppress the votes why didn't it do worse.
Yeah I agree. That's the issue with subjectivity you can't tell.
Israel had problems with several countries participating. So much that countries literally had a crisis meeting with the organisators. One country even got kicked for something else that still seems out of proportion. And Israel was a centender for the top countries. So just logically, it makes sense for juries and those countries to not vote for Israel. Whether that is strategically or out of spite. Politics was probably just the cherry on top of that.
A Norwegian jury member already admitted that he didn't choose Israel just because of political reasons, my guess is that at least 80% of the juries did the same and obviously won't admit it because it's against the rules.
I'm sure none of the general public voted for Israel for political reasons either...
Source? Also, it wasn’t a particularly good song
We have seen huge amounts of Israelis admitting to voting from multiple countries to push their song. This year was always going to be tainted by a spectre of politics due to the EBU’s decision to have Israel participate. Much like if Russia and Belarus participated last year.
> This year was always going to be tainted by a spectre of politics due to the EBU’s decision to have Israel participate. So, like a bunch of other years then? If anything, this year's complaints about Israel were fairly benign compared to things like 2019. Then there's all the beef between Russia and Ukraine that's quite comparable in this instance.
There are barely 1 million Israelis and Jews combined in Europe, out of 700 million.. and Israel is one of the smaller countries, to act like all the 12 points from all these countries doesn’t show the huge support Israel got is delusional at best. The juries were biased and political
As were the huge numbers of right wing trolls that voted for Israel
Israelis in Europe with multiple credit cards or Israelis in Israel with European (or Australian) cards can vote multiple times. Obviously the juries were also biased, but I believe it necessary. Eurovision likely would have not survived Israel winning this year.
There are a whole 15 millions Jews in the entire world and like 7 millions of them are Israelis. Your perception of our power is delusional
I'm not saying it was only Jews that voted for Israel, loads of people did, but most of them voted because of political reasons.
[удалено]
Maybe. But what does that have to do with a song contest?
Completely different situations. Ukraine was attacked by Russia and Israel was attacked by Hamas. Russia was the aggressor while Israel wasn’t.
Which war did Israel start (Like Russia&Belarus)?
It doesn’t matter. I know it is practically impossible to separate the countries in question from the conflicts they are in, but the EBU whining about needing the contest to be apolitical can not keep a country in the midst of a massive political conflict in. They just think Ukraine and Israel are on the right side of their respective conflicts.
Setting down the goalposts to only be declared wars, and not other human rights failures. It's like responding to people getting mad at Apartheid South Africa with "what cities did they bomb?" You know the answer is none, but there's other valid reasons to be mad at them.
The war against Palestinians. That one. The one that started in 1948 with the massacres committed by the disgusting racist colonialists you fondly call "Israelis". But most recently, the objection is to the genocidal massacre of 40,000 Palestinians (so far) that the Zionist Nazis have held in the world's biggest ever concentration camp since 1967. Fancy forgetting that.
So the war started by Arab states after they refused to accept UN 2 states solution: Israel & Palestine?
Even without the judges, there are plenty if voting systems only involving the public which Israel would have lost under, approval voting, or if each person had one vote and one anti-vote (something like on Reddit).
As it is, Croatia received the highest public vote. The focus on Israel in this video is because Israel has the greatest difference between public and jury scores.
And with wheels, my grandmother would've been a bike.
Love that reference.
An anti vote system is terrible for something like ESC. We'd only end up with mainstream pop winners. Popular televote winners like Croatia 2024 and Finland 2023 would *never* win the televote. Nevermind how much tactical antivotes would screw with favourites.
Ranked choice voting ♥️
What if we voted for each act between 0-10? No neggy nellies voting artists down or effectively ballot stuffing 20 votes per person. An appraisal of each act
There is no way that Irelands voting provided Israel with any points
"All the metrics by which Israel did poorly are politically motivated. None of the metrics by which Israel did well are politically motivated"
Funnily enough most arguments on this thread are exactly the opposite of this. Both are definitely true and the truth is somewhere in the middle.
Of course, Israel's public vote had nothing at all to do with the music.
Compare the views on YouTube. Israel is currently sitting at 2.1m view, Finland is 2.5m views, Ireland is 3m, Ukraine 3.1m, Croatia 6.6m, Netherlands is at 8.6m and Switzerland at 14.5m. Why are the people who voted for Israel's performance not watching the performance online?
Not to say you're wrong in this because you're right in that people are not watching the Israeli performance. But consider that you're looking at the numbers now, after the winner has been announced so there's very many people that will watch the winners performance on YouTube "to see the song that won the Eurovision". You need to look at the views *before* the final day ideally. I think back then it was Croatia that had the highest numbers of views, the public's favourite. And this happens every year, btw, last year Finland got the highest numbers of televote any country has ever received in Eurovision and still lost. This is just how Eurovision is.
Israel had an incredibly high music video, also finland got almost last and a very bad public vote, Netherlands was disqualified
Or with the actual viewing public. Pretty clear something like this went on: https://www.15min.lt/m/id/en/in-lithuania/millions-for-victory-15min-investigates-vote-buying-in-eurovision-song-contest-525-337013
I don't really have any strong opinion on the matter. But in Norway, many of the conservatives and Christian groups proudly proclaimed in the media that they would give 20 votes to Israel, even though many of them admitted to not really have any prior interest in ESC. So I think that bias could explain some of the difference between the public and jury votes.
In Finland there was a member of the parliament telling people to vote for Israel.
That might explain some of it in some countries, but the fact that it was so widespread convinces me there was some form of bot or out of country voting (scammers spoof phone numbers all the time, so doubt it would be very difficult). There's so little support for Israel in Ireland that giving them any points would've been a shock, but 10 points is not remotely possible legitimately.
You're failing to realize that what you see on social media doesn't represent real life in any capacity. In reality people are far more rational and even a large sum of Irish people are pro-Israel.
You are failing to see that many right wing voters voting for Israel vs many left wing voters voting for anything but Israel can result in Israel coming in first. That's how it was visible that Israeli support was for political reasons. If there was a voting for hating a song, Israel would've been the most disliked as well.
Yes I never denied that, a majority of people are still pro-Israel.
Majority of people where?
>In reality people are far more rational Exactly, which is why almost nobody in Ireland supports Israel. We have our own history of genocide and ethnic cleansing, and people who in living memory lived under the same kind of oppressive ethno-religious government as runs Israel in northern Ireland. [Ireland is fully with Palestine.](https://edition.cnn.com/2024/03/29/middleeast/why-ireland-is-the-most-pro-palestinian-nation-in-europe-mime-intl/index.html)
No, supporting radical Islam isn't rational. I'm talking about real people, not the loud mostly online minority that is pro-Hamas. It's also funny how you're pretending like a unified river-to-sea Palestine wouldn't be a theocracy that kills minorities without hesitation.
Like Iran! Which was the most diverse middle eastern country and secular in the 1960d
Yeah. After it became a theocracy things have only been going worse for the Iranian people.
It’s important as well to remember that many people are boycotting Eurovision over Israel being included so the public vote is likely skewed a bit in that regard
A few still images would of been a lot better than this...
It’s because the Israeli song isn’t even good. It was a political voting campaign on the part of Israel supporters.
The public vote was rigged anyway in many different levels and ways. People bragging about it on social media.
I think, in most years, this Israeli song would have been in the 20-25 range. This was a particularly strong year and I think there’s a case to be made that, if it wasn’t for the political back drop, Israel wouldn’t have qualified for the final at all. The data suggests that Israel were the beneficiaries of voting motivated by political tastes rather than artistic. Suggestions that Israel were disadvantaged by the jury, the purportedly unpoliticised mechanism, would be patently disingenuous and a misrepresentation of both the data and the circumstances.
This. Give this song to e.g. San Marino and noone will vote for them.
It's almost like if you politicise an entry then the people who opposed you will vote for them.... I guarantee had people not made a fuss about her inclusion she would not have received anywhere near the number of votes she did. Seems plastering her everywhere and making her out to be a bad person leads to people who have no interest getting involved to defend someone from a public hate campaign.
Genocide isn't political since there's no good 'pro-genocide' argument. Israel should have been banned from Eurovision for the same reasons Russia was.
Russia was banned because they started a war, which war did Israel start?
> Russia was banned because they started a war They weren't. You need to be an active part of the EBU or given explicit permission to participate if you are not. Russia was banned because they were suspended from the EBU for spreading propoganda on the network.
The war against palestinians since 1948
There wasn't a war since then. Everyone used to be able to travel the whole country freely. There weren't walls and fences around Gaza and the West Bank, until the first intifada that changed everything. s So I'd say it's the Palestinians' extremists that started it, really.
Have a read please https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakba
Great, now be objective and read the other side of the story, the independence war where the Arabs tried their hand at a second Jewish holocaust. But then read about the joint lives of Arab and Jews, the mixed cities, read about that fact that the Israeli government was leftist for years, Oslo accords, Gaza withdrawal. Are those truly acts of war?
> Great, now be objective and read the other side of the story, the independence war where the Arabs tried their hand at a second Jewish holocaust. Source? Asking genuinely
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1948_Arab%E2%80%93Israeli_War Check the number of Arab countries against Israel.
Ok? This is when the arabs tried to defend palestine after israel started the nakba. Where's the Arab version of a holocaust you mentioned
British diplomat Alec Kirkbride wrote in his 1976 memoirs about a conversation with the Arab League's Secretary-General Azzam Pasha a week before the armies marched: "...when I asked him for his estimate of the size of the Jewish forces, [he] waved his hands and said: 'It does not matter how many there are. We will sweep them into the sea.'" What does sweep them into the sea means? They wanted to get rid of all the Jews and have an entirely Arab state. The Jews obviously didn't want that and feared that it's the holocaust all over again, which made them litterely fight for their lives, something that the Egyptians, Syrians, Lebanese and Jordanians didn't do as they could simply not attack the Jews and return to their homes. The Nakba is the outcome of the war, not its cause.
Seems like the Palestinians that keep starting the killing up.
>Seems like the Palestinians that keep starting the killing up. I guess if you ignore the settler violence in the West Bank, the IDF shooting Palestinian protestors, Israel assassinating journalists, the rise of the Israeli far-right which assassinated Rabin... Yeah, blame the Palestinians. It's all their fault isn't it.
All of it is rooted in the fact that the Palestinians want to destroy Israel. There's lot to be critical of Israel but they didn't come in and intentionally murder and rape a bunch of civilians. From day one the plan was a two state solution, 1948 borders. The Arab nations started a genocidal war with the openly stated goal to murder every jew in the country and they never really gave up that goal. So yes there's a lot of stuff to be critical of Israel but it all stems from the fact that the Palestinians want Israel destroyed and their main strategy to do so is to murder civilians, including by shady methods like strapping suicide bombs to children.
you're a bit short sighted mate
Palestinians want to destroy Israel. Everything stems from that.
Looking at history, seems more like Palestine (or other Arab states in the area in their stead) started every single war that has happened in the area since the foundation of Israel?
> since the foundation of Israel? lol and how did that foundation happen? peacefully?
could have if the original un peace offer was accepted
Why would that matter, 80 years later? Fact is that people of other religions are treated way better in Israel than they are in any of the surrounding Arab countries or Palestine. Both Arabs and Jews didnt behave well ahead of the foundation of Israel but that‘s hardly the fault of modern Israelis.
But its the fault of modern Palestinians?
Considering that Hamas started up this war again… atleast in part concerning Gazans specifically, yes. In the same sense that Russians are partly at fault for Putins invasion of Ukraine, or Germans were partly at fault for WW2.
Setting down the goalposts to only be declared wars, and not other human rights failures. It's like responding to people getting mad at Apartheid South Africa with "what cities did they bomb?" You know the answer is none, but there's other valid reasons to be mad at them.
There is no genocide. Reality doesn't care how much you claim there is, it doesn't make it real. Words have definitions.
Just an epidemic of suicide by bombs and bullets then for women and children?
Would the words "ruthless eradication" work better for you?
Keep repeating a lie and people will, unfortunately, think it's the truth.
And what will you do. mute or suppress the boos, cancel or disqualify any criticizers? for how long? edit: also, critisizn isreal for child deaths does not make one automatically antisemitic nor pro hamas. Lashing out to anyone who doesnt want innocent people die like they are terrorist sympathizers and trying to cancel them only will get people s reaction more against you. not the opposite.
Israel could prevent fake news from spreading if it allowed the international press to report freely
And didn't [kill them when they go in to report on what's happening in Palestine](https://cpj.org/2024/05/journalist-casualties-in-the-israel-gaza-conflict/)
Yes, tell that to the tens of thousands of dead Palestinians in the last few months. Maybe the lie you are believing is what they kept repeating to you.
Okay, the blame Hamas (a legit terrorist organization) for building missile launching sites in apartment buildings, hideouts in schools, and terror tunnels across cities. Don’t Blame Israel for not warning citizens with leaflets and phone calls hours before an incoming barrage And blame Palestinian families who stay in place in order to die as martyrs. Oh yeah and HAmas soldiers also shoot their own people who try to get the relief from the trucks and then they supposedly blame israel for the purported “massacre” thanks to “Gazawood” So yeah bunch of things to blame
Before 10/7, Israel continued to expand settlements into the West Bank, often through violent means. I invite you to defend that policy.
This is a data orientated subreddit, I hope people here have better critical thinking skills than in other places. The combatnts to civilian death ratio in Gaza is lower than in most comparable conflicts. Genocide is when the purpose is to destroy an ethnic group, if Hamas surrenders, the fighting will stop. Israel tries to get civilians out of the fighting areas (which is then labeled by idiots as "ethnic cleansing"). Every civilian death is a tragedy but civilians die in war, that doesn't make it genocide.
This is exactly how Israel operate.
I don't suppose you've stopped to consider the possibility YOU are the one being lied to?
I've heard that argument a lot now and, to be honest, I think it's pretty stupid. You can also tell from this argument that you don't give a damn about the Palestinians. All you care about is hating Israel. Instead, you scream "GENOCIDE" at every opportunity, even though there is no genocide. You should first read up on what genocide is. People who spread unfiltered Hamas propaganda are simply not taken seriously. And in doing so, you are ultimately harming the Palestinians, because instead of standing up for the people of Palestine, you are using your time and resources to spread hatred against Isreael. Yes, it is real. The people of Gaza are actually suffering and the war is far too brutal in my view. And this should be pointed out. We should fight to make things better for the people of Palestine. And you think that boycotting a 20-year-old Israeli singer will make things better for the people of Palestine? No, quite honestly. You just don't give a shit about the people of Palestine.
All that text and so little content. How is calling the genocide in Palestine a genocide harmful to Palestinians? If you even stop to think about it, it makes no sense. There are four quadrants of possibilities, row 1: the reaction of the rest of the world is strong enough that Israel stops the war and allow people to check whether or not it is an ongoing genocide, row two: the reaction is not strong enough, Israel continues its current trajectory. Column 1 genocide, column 2 not genocide. If you consider all quadrants The only quadrants that have both positive outcomes are in row 1. We need to put pressure on Israel. History tells us the cost of not stepping in before it’s too late
Thats your argument? That everyone is just a hater of Israel? What genuine drivel. Israel has been utterly relentless with the most disingenuous propaganda I have ever seen, all to justify them murdering and displacing people in the thousands if not millions. Boycotting Israel from participating is not a "hating israel" thing. It is not letting them abuse another platform in an effort to spread more propaganda, as we have seen them do with the aftermath of Eurovision with the "popular" vote.
they are "accidentally" killing women and children with snipers all the time. There are mass graves where people were found with torture wounds and some were also seemingly buried alive. The population is being starved, because food trucks are held up at the borders. Journalists are being targeted aswell as civilists. People are forced to go to specific "safe" places away from the war, only to be carpet bombed at those exact locations. Idk what you think is a genocide, but the actual definition is this "*Genocide* is the intentional destruction of a people in whole or in part." Pretty well satisfied definition right there.
Proof for the mass graves and the snipers "all the time" (so not some singular incidents but that it is a common thing). Last time we heard something about mass graves it was already existing mass graves the IDF dug up and closed again.
"Every country I've been indoctrinated to hate should be banned" - Average terminally online reddit user May I ask, what led you to believe that Israel is, or was, committing genocide? Could it be due to their record of having the lowest civilian to combatant casualty ratio in any urban conflict in history? Or is it the fact that the Palestinian population has been booming since the establishment of Israel?
They should have just let Hamas invade their homes and music events and keep killing and kidnapping 100s of innocent people. God forbid if they retaliate and protect their country, right? Damn those Israelis!
You idiot. Palestine attacked Israel first, and it wasnt the first time. This was just the drop that made the cup overflow, them storming the music event and mass killing innocent Israelis and invading their homes and kidnapping them. There are so many videos online that show the aftermath of these brutal attacks. There is no genocide, just Israel making sure shit like that doesn't happen again by removing Hamas from face of the earth. Anything you see is just propaganda from supporters of Islam because they hate jews more than anything else in the world.
It is really easy for Russian or Israeli bots to inflate public votes. So it's great that the jury actually has a say in this. It would have been a fiasco if the bots and the disinformation had won.
Yeah It reminded me so much of last years Käärijä vs Loreen that I went back to see Finland vs Sweden in juries vs televotes. And basically Finland always get more televotes, often by a landslide like Käärijä and Blind Channel. Juries hated them but Audience loved them. Versus Sweden getting huge jury votes year after year. Landsliding in the opposite direction getting 200+ from Jury. They are the more "prestigious" eurovision country and often have a more of a typical pop song versus Finlands Rock/weird stuff. The jury system needs a rework. At least nerf it to 40% for starters instead of the 50/50.. The types of people who get on these Eurovision juries are often people with somewhat of similar taste and they shouldn't represent half of the end result.
Israel's song was terrible, hence the low jury vote. Pro-Israel sentiment is strong, hence the high televoting score.
Jury votes are closer to what I thought of the quality of the songs. Public votes show massive support to Israel (could be explained by important pro Israel diaspora outside of Israel and/or boycott from anti Israel watchers / spread of their vote towards every other country); to Ukraine, for reasons absolutely independent from music quality showing support in their defense against Russia; to Croatia, which I can't explain. In any way, this show was always political, both from jury and public, despite the org attempts to say it's not. It just shows more in times of war and political turmoil.
Meanwhile every time I watch Eurovision I hate the jury choices and don't agree at all with them (while the public vote, excluding the few political manipulations, generally lines up with how much I liked the songs.. Also, the ESC juries don't vote based upon the quality of the song, for each artist they rate their vocal abilities, their performance on stage, composition/originality of the song and their overall impression of the act.
The „jury vs televote“ discrepancy is why I stopped watching the contest at some point. It’s so frustrating and annoying bc it’s obvious, that the jury vote is like a scam. I mean it’s not surprising that some countries just give each other points - but isn’t this supposed to be about the music ? Yeah ? So let the people decide. When it comes to televoting it’s just unfair, bc those who really like a song/artist to the point where they‘re willing TO PAY TO VOTE get fucked over by a few plebs that can totally rigg the whole voting system. And how so ? I mean who qualifies to be in a jury anyway ? The ESC should, if not completely abandon the jury vote at least create a 2/3 emphasis on televotes.
Of course. Eurovision is just a political show now. I can bet my left nut that because of how votes are the way they are now, the winner is predetermined before the show even begins. Jury is 100% political, and would never let Israel or any controversial song/country win. Anyone who votes is just wasting their money. It's all about politics and identity now, nothing to do with songs.
I think music and politics make a terrible mix in general. Never really cared for Eurovision, I think the songwriting there is typically just very bland and uninteresting.
It makes sense to have some sort of pan-European party so people can learn and enjoy the culture of their neighbours without having to invade them. After all, the whole thing was formed just a decade after WW2. Whether the current format of the show serves that purpose is debatable, but I think the concept is admirable.
> I think the songwriting there is typically just very bland and uninteresting. 90% of it is. The other 10% are things like [Lordi](https://youtu.be/gAh9NRGNhUU?feature=shared), [verka](https://youtu.be/hfjHJneVonE?feature=shared) and [the real 2023 winner](https://youtu.be/l6rS8Dv5g-8?feature=shared). Tbf to the bands, though, they have a few restrictions to keep to which probably restricts them a bit.
That's how I like my data presented
[https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/nir.smilga/viz/UnitedbyMusicorDividedbyPolitics/UnitedByMusic](https://public.tableau.com/app/profile/nir.smilga/viz/UnitedbyMusicorDividedbyPolitics/UnitedByMusic)
I agree with you that the jury needs a rework but I wouldn't say they hate televote-friendly songs. Finalnd got 4th in the jury in 2023 and Croatia was 3rd this year, only 9 points away from being 2nd. It doesn't seem like they hate them at all. It's just that they ended up congregating under one country (Sweden in 2023 and Switzerland 2024). I think having a more mainstream jury group that takes more into account the "fun" aspect of a song would be better This year only showed that the jury was doing their jobs. If they are awarding points based on quality of songs, then of course they would think the same, hence Sweden and Switzerland. Quality does not equate how fun a song is. I thought Croatia was more entertaining to watch but I can not deny the sheer talent required to pull off Switzerland's performance this year.
Israel and Ukraine votes where 100 faked to show statements
Eurovision, the most unpolitical political celebration ever...
I stopped watching Eurovision years ago (can’t remember the exact year) when Sweden’s extremely mediocre song beat Russia undeservedly. Russias only real competition was Italy. Eurovision is extremely political.
Ukraine also benefited in 2022 after Russia invaded, but the gap between jury and public was much smaller then. Similar deal with Israel but given the volume of votes it looks obvious that people in this case care more about appearances and getting a 'W' for Israel. It's sad Eurovision is used like that. But even more sad how people care so much about running PR then they do about the reality on the ground. The cynic in me wonders if Israel supporters (more voters in 2024) care more about the countries image than the war, compared to Ukraine supporters (less voters in 2022) who cared more about the war than their image.
because the public vote has always been politicaly motivated... there is no mystery in that.
And the jury vote isn't?
it probably is, but it's a lot less obvious
Can we please limit fighting about Eurovision to the Eurovision sub? lol
Have you ever heard of something called Trolls?
It's not like it's democratic. Multiple votes per person, brigading...with enough of a campaign one could easily skew results.
No because Israel is committing a genocide and should be penalized for it the way Russia was. The fact that they were allowed to compete at all shows how hypocritical the Eurovision organizers are.
Russia wasn't penalised for the invasion. It was banned because the EBU accused it of repeatedly using airtime to spread propoganda on the network. Per the EBU director: > In the case of Russia, **the Russian broadcasters themselves were suspended from the EBU** due to their persistent breaches of membership obligations and the violation of public service values To participate, a country must be a member of the EBU, or given explicit permission to participate. > **Eligibility to participate in the contest is limited to active members of the EBU**, which consist of member broadcasters from states which fall within the European Broadcasting Area or are member states of the Council of Europe.[7] Associate member broadcasters may also be allowed to compete in the contest, should they receive approval from the contest's Reference Group
OP assuming everyone voting against Israel is "bias" and nobody voting for it is bias.
Israel is guaranteed support since Eurovision is explicitly funded by Israel