What can be done to boost the Eurovision winner (and entries) after the contest?

[Dima]

Most songs in the contest are “made” for Eurovision. 3 minute limit, lyrics simple enough for even non English speakers to remember,deliver a “message”, key change at the right time, “jury” friendly etc. Get rid of such limitations/expectations and maybe things might change.

 

[Chorizo]

*yawn* someone is a downer... and clearly didn't get the point of the thread either

This is not a thread about whether one likes the winner or not, it's not to discuss what one considers "quality" music or not, you can find other threads to discuss your dislike or like for certain entries, this thread is about what can be done to boost entries (in particular the winner) after ESC. I don't know in what bubble you live in, but in the "real world", a song like Toy has everything to become a big hit... maybe you lived under a rock or something, but there are hits out there that are far more "circus" as you call it than this song

Taste differs though, but people in the real world (not just "the bubble" as you refer to) like to be entertained and they like some fun in their lives, maybe you're not one of them and your're of course entitled to your taste, but then again this thread is not about your taste and definition of "quality", it's about something completely different.

Making sure that Eurovision is about good music and that a quality song wins would be important to boost the winners after the contest. If Eurovision were about cool and contemporary music, the winner would be played on the radio and many people who avoid Eurovision music now, would embrace it. The problem is the bad quality and the image of the contest. What I proposed would therefore help. What do you propose? Letting trash like Toy win and then trying to boost it by promoting the song although it's the kind of garbage that is only good for a good laugh during the show but not suitable for listening to it after? If you want the winners to be successful, you need to make sure that you have the right winners. There is just so much you can do to promote winners like Netta and Salvador because their songs are niche products. All the PR in the world couldn't change that.

 

[Alaska49]

this thread has seriously not considered the pop music charts have been historically almost entirely shaped by the tastes of very young people. basically whatever is on most radios ar any given moment is made to appeal to people under 25 because they are the biggest consumers of music and music-related businesses (touring, licensed products, etc). eurovision appeals to a much wider public, which is why it's much more suited to reveal potential unseen music businesses. it's why il volo was such a success and became more successful after eurovision, it was just not with the young crowd. eurovision will never succeed at attracting these young, chart-defining european people in big numbers. they have a whole lot of options they will choose over eurovision. eurovision's eggs should be put in the basket of appealing to people outside the pop music charts demographic.

also, even if i want people to see there is more than the freak show to eurovision, i do not want eurovision to lose this aspect entirely. i love lordi, i love netta, and people loved them too.

 

[A-lister]

Making sure that Eurovision is about good music and that a quality song wins would be important to boost the winners after the contest. If Eurovision were about cool and contemporary music, the winner would be played on the radio and many people who avoid Eurovision music now, would embrace it. The problem is the bad quality and the image of the contest. What I proposed would therefore help. What do you propose? Letting trash like Toy win and then trying to boost it by promoting the song although it's the kind of garbage that is only good for a good laugh during the show but not suitable for listening to it after? If you want the winners to be successful, you need to make sure that you have the right winners. There is just so much you can do to promote winners like Netta and Salvador because their songs are niche products. All the PR in the world couldn't change that.

We get it, you loath the winner this year, but your definition of "quality" has no grounds in the real world though... or do you honestly consider all "hits" out there to be "quality"? This is not about our personal opinions on the songs really. I think you should take a look at the top charts for the past years, songs like Toy would definitely not be out place there at all, but the problem is that Netta is released by a local Israeli label, and if you think it doesn't effect the impact it has (or lack of rather) then you don't seem to get the industry and the importance of having a major international label backing you, and it goes back to my original point again that EBU could team up with a major label and its marketing/promo department as a way to boost the winner after the contest. I'd say the winner deserves more from EBU than just the title and a Microphone statuette

I completely agree though that some winners might not "work", regardless of the push, and that's fine, we need different type of winners, but to see ESC die the day after the final each year when it has much more potential is just sad and in the end of the day actually a failure for a show of this magnitude that could play a more active role in the music business and be a force to be reckon with. The amount of exposure and following this show has is enough leg to stand on to build further on the momentum, but EBU does nothing to build on that. Eurovision is so big on its own that it has all the potential in the world, Eurovision doesn't even have to cater to the standard "norm" of the top. 40, it could be powerful enough to actually push the boundaries of what we perceive as "fit for being a hit". But if they won't even try, we will never find out

 

[LalehForWD]

Every year there is this idea of "good music" vs trash or commercial music vs "serious" music. There is no such conflict and every attempt of music valuation is pointless. Everyone is free to choose what they want to listen to and judgement based on others taste is utter snobbery. Eurovision fans should know this better than anyone.

 

[A-lister]

Pretty much everywhere else:

And especially outside the ESC bubble.

I think you should check the source, Billboard is very bad at reporting anything outside of USA, in Sweden for instance Netta peaked (so far) at #5 on the Official Swedish Singles Charts, Salvador peaked "only" at #33 (and spent only one week on the chart). I think Billboard uses iTunes purchases when they report from other countries, and most Europeans stream (or download stuff illegally which can't be counted at all), so it's a very small group (often older people) that actually purchase their music there so those charts you use I would take with a grain of salt.

I'd say to define a hit, you need to look at a combination of the following:

- Legal purchases (physical or digital)
- Streams (both on platforms like Spotify but also YT)
- Radio plays
- Club plays
- Longevity, social impact, viral impact (these are not so easy to measure)

I think for Eurovision, if we take a look the last decade we only had three cross-overs that worked; Loreen, Lena and to some extent Alexander Rybak, but I'm positive we'd have more (maybe not necessarily winners) if EBU played a more active part here.

 

[Alaska49]

The amount of exposure and following this show has is enough leg to stand on to build further on the momentum, but EBU does nothing to build on that. Eurovision is so big on its own that it has all the potential in the world, Eurovision doesn't even have to cater to the standard "norm" of the top. 40, it could be powerful enough to actually push the boundaries of what we perceive as "fit for being a hit". But if they won't even try, we will never find out

this discussion has no chance to flourish if you are not based on reality. eurovision absolutely does not have this much power and never did.

 

[hawadharma]

Any country should look up to and as a benchmark for quality music (I was gonna include if it was 10 years ago, now they are going downhill).

 

[A-lister]

this discussion has no chance to flourish if you are not based on reality. eurovision absolutely does not have this much power and never did.

I think you're underestimating it alot tbh, nearly 200mln viewers is a type of exposure anyone could ever dream of, it's all about how you capitalize from it but leaving the job to some local record labels isn't the way to build on the momentum.

In the past Eurovision wasn't that big though, but we live in different times, still though it was big enough to manage to be the breakthrough of some of the most successful acts in music ever like ABBA and Celine Dion, and there are various ESC entries throughout the time that crossed-over to become real classics.

 

[Alaska49]

but that's my point. eurovision wasn't that big in the past when it had MORE viewers than now because people had less options. people, specially the youngsters in charge of charts, have way too many options nowadays for eurovision to be a direct influence on their taste all by itself. all the promotion in the world wouldn't make kids suddenly like the ethnics and dramatics of eurovision. the contest would need to change to cater to their tastes, which is not what any of us want (and specially not you, considering your tirades against "anglovision" - do you think the contest could become more chart-savvy and remain european? nope. all the american trends would come).

it's very possible to repeat success cases like abba and celine but even they happened the way i said it - the reveal of a diamond in the rough, the reveal of a niche the big public didn't even know they wanted. i am fairly confident nobody thought in 1988 they needed a francophone frump yelling over a dramatic instrumental and that nobody ever thought she was cool and modern, but her style impacts popular music to this day. eurovision needs to stay true to itself because that's its biggest selling point. ebu can change people's perception of it in the west without resorting to "we are not like a regular contest, we are a cool contest", by going back to "this contest is about exchanging cultures, not giving you a summer hit". which is why juries suck - they undermine that very thought.

 

[lolita]

So if TOY had such big hit potential why did it do so much worse than Amar Pelos Dois at the charts?
And keep in mind in 2017 the viewership was lower and it's not like Amar Pelos Dois had the major backing of a label.

When I listen to Amar Pelos Dois, I feel like I am out of this world, it brings me to another dimension, it is so unique, peaceful, emotional, I can't even find a word to describe that feeling of warmth and joy in my heart. When I listen to Toy, I feel like I am at the chicken farm. Maybe that's why it is doing worse than Salvador, because lots of other people feel the same, outside this forum, of course, this forum is like Netta's fandom.

 

[Alaska49]

people seriously need to stop hijacking other threads to say toy isn't popular. toy is popular. it's still on many countries' top 50s. of course it's doing worse than the BIGGEST WINNER EVER points-wise. stop the fake news. get some perspective.

 

[lolita]

Well, it is popular, I see it, we were just comparing it to the biggest winner ever, as you've said. Toy is doing great, as I have noticed so far. He probably thought that Toy is more commercial than APD, but is doing slightly worse, that is all, but it is still doing excellent on its own.

 

[Alaska49]

yes but that's the point i have been making in every post of mine in this thread. toy is more "commercial" than amar pelos dois, but what is "commercial" actually appeals to a specific demographic and amar pelos dois revealed a wider appeal that could easily be capitalized. it didn't happen partly because salvador was very ill (and also a pompous jerk but i digress) but also because big companies cling to this idea of "commercial" that doesn't account for all the potential out there. no, amar pelos dois wouldn't come near the billboard hot 100 or something but that's not the only way to be really popular and profitable. if powerful people start to realize that, eurovision will look a lot more interesting to them.

 

[A-lister]

but that's my point. eurovision wasn't that big in the past when it had MORE viewers than now because people had less options. people, specially the youngsters in charge of charts, have way too many options nowadays for eurovision to be a direct influence on their taste all by itself. all the promotion in the world wouldn't make kids suddenly like the ethnics and dramatics of eurovision. the contest would need to change to cater to their tastes, which is not what any of us want (and specially not you, considering your tirades against "anglovision" - do you think the contest could become more chart-savvy and remain european? nope. all the american trends would come).

it's very possible to repeat success cases like abba and celine but even they happened the way i said it - the reveal of a diamond in the rough, the reveal of a niche the big public didn't even know they wanted. i am fairly confident nobody thought in 1988 they needed a francophone frump yelling over a dramatic instrumental and that nobody ever thought she was cool and modern, but her style impacts popular music to this day. eurovision needs to stay true to itself because that's its biggest selling point. ebu can change people's perception of it in the west without resorting to "we are not like a regular contest, we are a cool contest", by going back to "this contest is about exchanging cultures, not giving you a summer hit". which is why juries suck - they undermine that very thought.

Well, I think in a sense we agree here, I didn't say Eurovision should cater to trends (although it wouldn't harm for the contest to stay updated, but that's another point), but I said it's so big that with the right machinery behind it (after the contest) I don't see why it couldn't deliver hits or big names on its own terms (without compromising), but in this day of all the buzz and competition, without that big international label at least being signed on to push the winner entry, it's much harder than back then (as you mention) when there were less options.