Voting System for 2017?

[MyHeartIsYours]

Any ideas how to select the members of the international jury? I like the idea, but it seems difficult. If you choose members from participating countries, they'll be biased. If you choose members from non participating countries, you'd probably have to look for them in non-european countries. So they won't be "the voice of Europe", as you say.

Each broadcaster could select one, or they could be past Eurovision participants. If you're worried about bias then each jury member could stick to the cant vote for your own country rule.

 

[Sammy]

Each broadcaster could select one, or they could be past Eurovision participants. If you're worried about bias then each jury member could stick to the cant vote for your own country rule.

But that's basically done now, isn't it? Each broadcaster selects four jury members and they can't vote for their own country....

 

[Brandt]

https://www.facebook.com/EurovisionSongContest/posts/10154196749863007

EBU in action.

 

[Leydan]

Didn't even know there was a petition going on. :? Typical over dramatic eurofan response to not getting what they wanted.

 

[Brandt]

Didn't even know there was a petition going on. :?

Me neither. Although it is pretty obvious on Youtube videos dislikes rates which is pretty immature reaction.

 

[Romeo]

what was the peition about? getting the winner to be change? thats never going to happen..

I did reply to the post by saying I hope the system is changed. whether they keep the MF system or change it I think the juries need to be addressed.. Azerbaijan AGAIN had all of their jurors put Armenia in last place.. the 1-26 should be changed in favour of the 1-10 system again because a juror can ruin a country by putting it 26th

 

[Alaska49]

this year's system is the closest to best; i'd only make slight changes on the jury procedures (have 10 of them at least, make them choose only their top 10s and combine all ten top 10s into one, have them sequestered from each other, have them vote during the proper shows instead of the final rehearsal). there is no way to filter the televote, so they need to be super meticulous with the juries to ensure no further biases are added to the process; if they give the juries too much leeway on their behaviour i'd rather just have 100% televoting.

 

[A-lister]

2016:

Although I'm no super fan of juries I still see their point, I would maybe change to 60/40 in favor of the public though...

The ranking system is tricky, now that the public vote is having its fair share its negative impact is not as big as previous years, but then again the juries still manipulate results by putting some countries last on purpose (and not by objective judging), on the other hand ranking all means that they need to put more attention to each entry and I feel like an issue was that juries didn't pay as much attention to the songs but more to vocal gymnastics etc because they never got the time to build a proper "relationship" with each song. I think the jury process should be longer then, every member would have to listen to all songs carefully and not just judge on the jury finals because if only the latter the songs become secondary, when they should be the most important. Also more members in a jury group would make up a fairer result.

The spokespersons should give out the 8's and 10's like previous years, only giving out 12's felt too rushed and suspense-killing and quite frankly doesn't save much time but instead takes away alot of the feeling from the voting process and makes it slightly confusing and more difficult to follow for the average viewer.

Pay equal attention to all sets of votes from the public. Again it wouldn't take that much longer, but atleast make the public vote look equally important. It felt a little too rushed aswell.

2013-2015 were dreadful, the juries could easily manipulate the outcome, thankfully 2016 erased that aspect and made it more balanced, now atleast public's favorites will get some points even if the juries disagree and can't be totally erased by juries. Also the new system is as close to 50/50 you could get, which is only fair.

 

[A-lister]

https://www.facebook.com/EurovisionSongContest/posts/10154196749863007

EBU in action.

For once I agree with them

This petition is just silly and based on nothing other than bitter fans who didn't get their favorite as winner mixed with Kremlin trolls who are just... well... angry that Ukraine won (in particular in this context).

The rules and system were clear to all, and everyone signed up for it, so I'm happy EBU doesn't take notice about this sillyness.

 

[A-lister]

Revert to the system of last year. This new system allows diaspora voting to ruin the contest!

This is what caused Australia to be robbed this year!

No, Australia wasn't robbed, although diaspora voting is a problem you can't get really high points and positions only based on that. Australia was a distanced 4th to the top.2 atleast, they were not "robbed", in fact one can question why juries had them so high?

The 2016 is as fair as it could get, the juries shouldn't have more say than people, but I can agree that they are needed somehow, so simply let it be 50/50 as now (2016).

 

[ScarlettGirl]

I have a new suggestion for the new voting system. Instead of combining ALL the televotes, why not just hand out two pairs of 12s? One from the jury and one from the public.

Or is that a really stupid idea and I can´t think clear because I am so sick and have a massive hangover....
(I still prefer the old system though...)