SuperGirl
Member
- Joined
- August 16, 2014
- Posts
- 735
So in other words this is a unfair contest about money?
Yes, finalists will do well if they are good enough and this is why I think Big 5 entries shouldn't be played in semis.
The big 5 semi-finalists?
- Thread starter FilipFromSweden
- Start date
- Watchers 2
So in other words this is a unfair contest about money?
Yes, finalists will do well if they are good enough and this is why I think Big 5 entries shouldn't be played in semis.
penguinperson
Active member
- Joined
- July 7, 2011
- Posts
- 1,190
As I said it is a TV show with a contest element. Production will be aimed at making a profitable TV show with maximum reach. Most TV contests are not 'fair,' and with TV it always comes back to money in the end. Some broadcasters need to make money from advertising which viewership will attain. Public broadcasters need viewers to justify the money spent on projects collected primarily from the public. Therefore TV shows will always be a reflection of production decisions to maximise ratings in desirable demographics broadcasters want to attract. In many instances these decisions are unfair but make business sense. The Big 5 consist of half the ratings ESC finals get more or less. In the current climate where most shows have year on year drops (ESC has also dropped from several years ago) there is no way any production team would make the decision to knowingly cut off their noses to spite their faces for 'fairness.'
The producers deciding the running order is another aspect of this.
SuperGirl
Member
- Joined
- August 16, 2014
- Posts
- 735
It still a compettition. Gosh this arrogance from EBU and the Big 5 make me think all other countries should withdraw. Then the big 5 could have it. I mean according you the rest of Europe don't need to be there.
Sweden alone show more excitement, love for ESC than any of the big 5. But we don't deserve to be in final because we aren't big country?
penguinperson
Active member
- Joined
- July 7, 2011
- Posts
- 1,190
Directly it isn't the EBU which give the total worth to the Big 5 it is the sponsors and advertisers which give that value to those markets they wish to reach. Though they may not all advertise they want those countries to get involved in social media which will have no such restrictions for example. If the Big 5 were to go others would take their place with those with the greatest intrinsic value.
The grand prixs are in a similar position again designed to make money and therefore designed by producers not to upset the model. Again there are levels of manipulation by money paid into it to promote certain artists the record label wants to. There is a need to fill seats and that will reflect on what acts and songwriters which are selected rather than what would be fair and based on quality. It again comes back to the business decisions in production for money.
EDC0708
Well-known member
- Joined
- January 12, 2014
- Posts
- 3,625
Do any of the big 5 show adverts during Eurovision? The BBC can't show adverts, and usually cut away from the last few seconds of ESC each year so that the sponsors are not shown. I don't think Spain, Germany or France show adverts during Eurovision either, does anyone know?
Also in Germany there aren´t adverts during the ESC-shows (public brodcasters aren´t allowed to show adverts after 20:00). But ARD doesn´t cut away from the last few seconds.
The only excepton was when besides one of the ARD-chanels one of the semis was aired by the private broadcaster Pro7. They had some commercial breaks during the show.
toinou03
Well-known member
- Joined
- October 26, 2011
- Posts
- 5,805
Same in France as Germany.
France Télévision can't show any advert after 20:00. (Though the law may be turned off with the all-liberalization laws we have by now
) On the contrary sponsors are authorized anytime, so that they should be shown without any problem. 
siebel
Member
- Joined
- November 9, 2014
- Posts
- 127
I am also for Big5 in the semi-final. As a competitors ofcourse. There are no "big" and "small" countries if we are talking about music contest. At the end, it could only be a good thing for them because if they have a good song others will hear it more and in the final they will have a more chance to get a points. Today they are always in the bottom because when you hear the song first time - its hard to like it immediately (unless you have some super-catchy song like Germany 2010). Sometimes i really feel sorry for them, they didnt deserve it. Also, people from other countries won't vote for them because they also see that unfair "big" and "small" separation and dont want to give their vote to someone who is here because of some privileges, people are always on the side of "small" ones, in any way. So, lets get rid of that ridiculous "small" and "big" things and put the song in the front of everthing.
And one more thing, if you want to call yourself a "big5" because you represent a huge nation, then for a God sake sing ON YOUR OWN LANGUAGE. I think that its more important to put in the rules that Germany have to sing on german, France on french (and so on) to hear in the european contest those BIG FIVE EUROPEAN LANGUAGES. "Show" something more to Europe when you have to be here in the final....
And one more thing, if you want to call yourself a "big5" because you represent a huge nation, then for a God sake sing ON YOUR OWN LANGUAGE. I think that its more important to put in the rules that Germany have to sing on german, France on french (and so on) to hear in the european contest those BIG FIVE EUROPEAN LANGUAGES. "Show" something more to Europe when you have to be here in the final....
This "big 5 issue" is tiring really. Everyone knows it is unfair, but if those countries happened to compete in the semis, I highly doubt they'd pay as much for the contest as now. The contest is expensive and with a lower Financial contribution from them, I wonder how much it would affect its organization.
It's a little off-topic, but as we talk about money, I've always thought that the jury comeback was somehow meant to favor the richer countries during the crisis. Since 2009, all the winners could definitely afford hosting the contest, this year was no exception... but maybe I'm overthinking it.
It's a little off-topic, but as we talk about money, I've always thought that the jury comeback was somehow meant to favor the richer countries during the crisis. Since 2009, all the winners could definitely afford hosting the contest, this year was no exception... but maybe I'm overthinking it.
Let's be honest, I think every true, objective person will agree that every country SHOULD go through the same process and giving a handful of countries special privileges feels wrong.
And yes, the money those countries bring to the table is significant and plays a pretty big part but just imagine if the UK, Germany, France and Spain all fail to qualify. The viewing figures would drop dramatically and whether or not we like it, that could have MAJOR implications on the future of the contest. The contest makes money and we live in a capitalistic world so I highly doubt the Big 5 Status is going to go away anytime soon.
And yes, the money those countries bring to the table is significant and plays a pretty big part but just imagine if the UK, Germany, France and Spain all fail to qualify. The viewing figures would drop dramatically and whether or not we like it, that could have MAJOR implications on the future of the contest. The contest makes money and we live in a capitalistic world so I highly doubt the Big 5 Status is going to go away anytime soon.
FilipFromSweden
Well-known member
- Joined
- March 27, 2012
- Posts
- 6,659
I know that the auto-final is some kind of reward to them, but imo the only one that should be in the final without having to through semi-finals is the host country.
My idea is that the big 5 countries gets to decide what starting position they will have in the semi-final including if they would qualify to the grand final. But since SVT ruined that ..
My idea is that the big 5 countries gets to decide what starting position they will have in the semi-final including if they would qualify to the grand final. But since SVT ruined that ..
Well, I'm wondering if, with the juries, a really poor country or a country with a broke broadcaster can win Eurovision in order to hosting it the year after, thinking e.g. about
Yes, I'm wondering too. We have yet to see that indeed.
Austria was a nice winner this year, but it's a "rich" country again: by coincidence, the Netherlands were 2nd. I wouldn't be surprised if it was their turn next year.