Update: New Voting System - Countries 11 to 26 will be only displayed

[RainyWoods]

I'd be a filthy liar if I said I didn't enjoy how they did the votes tonight. Those of us having a hissy fit over the change when it was announced...... were wrong *holds hands up*. My gosh, it was sooooo exciting! I was watching with my father and we were both on the edge of our seats.

 

[Dessi]

OK, this was exciting ... dramactic... something else maybe??? :?
Can I go to sleep now??? :?
...and hope you don't hate Sweden and our funny ways of doing thing, change everything??? So you write like ten houndreds of pages how useless we are....
... There has been so much hate towards Sweden... :?

I just want to go to bed now...*soooooo exhausted* :?

 

[revallsay]

The new voting system is so good! I hate it when they explained it, but when it was going on I was so excited! I want it next year It's the biggest winner of this year's Eurovision cheart

 

[hdplus]

I liked the new voting system,
but now even the 'not-euro-fans' know that Jamala didn't win the televote (and jury voting) and many people are disliking her videos/performances on YouTube (don't know if that's the reason, but I think it partly is)

I loved the akward moment when nobody was able to calculate if those 360 points were enough for Jamala to win and everyone waited for the table

 

[theditz83]

I tried my best to explain the televoting points to my friends but they just didn't understand - they still don't get the points allocation.

I think the graphics on screen should have shown the total number of points to allocate for the televoting and then the hosts or graphics should say or display for each song what total percentage of the televotes they received and what points total this equates to. That's still the part that regular bystanders who have never watched something with a similar system (i.e. Melodifestivalen) before have the most difficulty in understanding.

But it definitely served its purpose in making the ending more exciting as everyone in my house believed Australia could never be beaten after the lead they had from the juries and I just kept saying "just wait and see how this changes..."

 

[EscGeek]

I loved the akward moment when nobody was able to calculate if those 360 points were enough for Jamala to win and everyone waited for the table

 

[midnightsun]

I loved the new presentation of the votes. It was so exciting and, also important to me, a lot of countries got their 15 "seconds" of fame that way. Being acknowleged by the juries must have made them feel so good. This way a lot of different countries got their 12 points and a few seconds in the limelight.
I do understand people weren't able to calculate the points at the end of the presentation; obviously many were too excited to think about. Poor Sergey, his face then, he was so nervous and me too, I hoped Russia would win. :-)

 

[A-lister]

So, I actually like the new system, but I still think the spokespersons should give out the top. 3 and that every public point should be given out in the end...

But all in all I liked it and hope they keep it, it was really keeping the suspense up and was made nicely.

 

[Swedenvision]

The voting was extremely exciting.
Good job by SVT to introduce this in ESC too.

 

[Quent91]

ok, I must admit I quite liked the new voting system, because of more suspense. But, two things : I don't understand why the spokespersons only said the douze points. They still could have said the 8 and 10 points, it wouldn't have taken so much more time. And also, I wanted to see the detailed results from the televotes ! I wanted to see the points sent by every country to the others !

 

[Chorizo]

I was skeptical about changing the voting system and I think it's understandable that people are critical of changes to something that has a long tradition but now I am happy about this change. Not all Swedish changes are bad.

Now that the show is over, I think we can agree that this voting system is indeed very exciting. It depends on the year, of course. This year was perfect because the winner was not known until the end and there was no clear favorite to win the show. With such a result, this voting system is perfect. With a clear winner, it would be less exciting but not worse than the old system. Seeing how different the juries and audience vote for countries like Poland and Austria is part of the fun.

So they definitely should keep the new system but I think it should be further optimized.

I don't like that only the 12 points are read out. This year, the votes went to many different countries and a large part of the juries didn't just support neighbors. Who expected the 12 points from Norway to go to Italy and Sweden getting nothing? But I don't like that the new system only focuses on the winner. It would be nice to read out the top 3 again. I understand that they need to save time but I think it would be better to cut the unnecessary chitchat and compliments. That was scripted anyway.
I was only focused on who got the points this year and didn't pay attention to what they were saying anyway. I also lost track of the lower placed countries. So slowing this down would be better. It wouldn't be a big loss, if we didn't hear "What a great show tonight" or similar things anymore. Cutting that is a better way to save time.

I also think it would be nice to show a map that indicates where the votes come from. The countries that vote for an entry could light up and the brightness could indicate the number of points. A different graphic system achieving the same result would be fine too but I would like to see where people voted for an entry. This would make it less anonymous. I think the EBU probably prefers to avoid this because it would highlight the diaspora vote and the EBU is probably happy they can hide it with the new system.

 

[ChrisOL]

I was only focused on who got the points this year and didn't pay attention to what they were saying anyway. I also lost track of the lower placed countries. So slowing this down would be better.

That was my problem too, it was too much at once. And I didn't know how much points all countries already had (except Australia), I lost track of the scoreboard

 

[musicfan]

Should the jury votes get all this detail and the televotes just be an accumulated total, or should it really be the other way round?

 

[gonzerelli]

Should the jury votes get all this detail and the televotes just be an accumulated total, or should it really be the other way round?

So would you prefer to spend an hour collating all the televotes, only to have the jury votes completely obliterate those results in a few minutes?

 

[Chorizo]

Should the jury votes get all this detail and the televotes just be an accumulated total, or should it really be the other way round?

The televote is so dominated by the diaspora and the neighbor vote that the 12 points of many countries are obvious. It's more interesting to see the jury results and being in the focus puts more pressure on the juries to vote objectively. There is no point in watching diaspora and neighbor points being awarded for 30 minutes. The new system isn't perfect either and I want something to be done to reduce the influence of the diaspora vote but as long as we have it, it's boring to watch it.

 

[musicfan]

So would you prefer to spend an hour collating all the televotes, only to have the jury votes completely obliterate those results in a few minutes?

Well I suppose it would show people how pointless spending much money to vote is when a handful of people just overturn it.

 

[musicfan]

The televote is so dominated by the diaspora and the neighbor vote that the 12 points of many countries are obvious. It's more interesting to see the jury results and being in the focus puts more pressure on the juries to vote objectively.

It's bullshit to say there's objective or even very skilled jury voting. When they do know what the hell they are actually doing they could be bribed, follow a political line, or just follow the reputation and hype. To say all televotes are just diaspora isn't convincing. The audience who vote help fund the show anyway, why just dismiss what they do? If some think a diaspora has to big a say in their region's vote they can always get off their ass and vote themselves to counter it. I don't see what pressure there is on juries, the votes are all just stuck together, few will bother searching for the details.

 

[musicfan]

And if the jury are supposed to be so objective then they would speak as one voice wouldn't they?

 

[Chorizo]

It's bullshit to say there's objective or even very skilled jury voting. When they do know what the hell they are actually doing they could be bribed, follow a political line, or just follow the reputation and hype. To say all televotes are just diaspora isn't convincing. The audience who vote help fund the show anyway, why just dismiss what they do? If some think a diaspora has to big a say in their region's vote they can always get off their ass and vote themselves to counter it. I don't see what pressure there is on juries, the votes are all just stuck together, few will bother searching for the details.

Just look at where the 12 points go to in the televote this year compared to the jury vote. The ex-USSR and ex-Yugoslavia are the most obvious offenders.
Not all televotes are from the diaspora or for neighbors but presenting these results would mean that we would have few surprises and people would get angry at the voting patterns again like in the 2000s.

Maybe "objective" is too strong of a word here, so let's say they should vote professionally and they are more likely to do that, when millions of people are watching them.

 

[Chorizo]

And if the jury are supposed to be so objective then they would speak as one voice wouldn't they?

They can still disagree, for example, whether Australia or Ukraine is better or if Georgia is a good entry or not. Coming to different conclusions doesn't mean they are unprofessional.

Supporting a neighbor just for the sake of it is unprofessional and not objective. That's something more common in the televote these days. The juries have actually improved in this regard.