Eurovision - UK gets 0 points

[plymothian]

I can't guarantee it is everywhere but BBC local radio stations in the south east and (from a quick look at the schedules, other parts of the country) have a programme - BBC Music Introducing on a Saturday night from 20:00. Has anyone even tried to find whether anyone on there is suitable? Some of the stuff I have heard isn't bad. They'll have the tapes, someone would have listened. Maybe nothing of any use. There is every chance that this would be their one crack at fame, they will get more publicity than they would do performing at the Dog and Duck so being on the programme will count even if the finish 23rd, and some people listening might well download some of their music. It can't be any worse ...

I might have got this wrong because I've never seen it but isn't that the one that is for all types of entertainment (didn't a dog act win once - now that's an idea, a singing dog). Also I think X-Factor, the singing one, concentrates on the singer not the song, so Alexandra Burke won by massacring Hallelujah. We want a decent song first.

Yes, they've done both of them - 2014 Molly (Children of the Universe) came from BBC Introducting. Ended up 17/26. And in 2017 Lucie Jones (Never Give up on You) was a former X Factor contestant, came 15/26.

If anyone remembers the sitcom from the 1990s: "The High Life" starring Alan Cumming, I believe they did an episode where Scotland entered a Eurovision-equivalent contest- with the cabin crew of "Air Scotia" being chosen to perform.

Pif Paf Pof, my heart goes Pif Paf Pof. Pif Paf Pof, I wanna have it off till I cough.

 

[johncrossley]

The voting system for the public vote (in particular) makes it difficult for politics to cause a country to get 0 points. Sure, it is easy to vote for your neighbouring country even if you don't particularly care for the song, so in that way the public vote can be political. But in order to punish a country you don't like for political reasons you have to choose *not* to vote for a song you actually think is the best, and for the vast majority of people across Europe to do likewise. When you think about it, someone who is that bothered enough to vote in Eurovision isn't going to go out of their way to boycott a particular country and to vote for a song they actually think is not as good.

 

[Scotrail314209]

The UK definitely has the ability to do well in Eurovision, we just need to look at the times we've won, as well as the amount of time we came 2nd place.

Then it seems at the turn of millennium we just failed dramatically. It was a slippery slope from coming 16th in 2000 (which would be a celebration for us nowadays) to getting last place in 2003.

 

[yorksrob]

"Boom Bang a Bang" and "Making Your Mind Up" were excellent tunes.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Pif Paf Pof, my heart goes Pif Paf Pof. Pif Paf Pof, I wanna have it off till I cough.

Oh yeah, that was it... not as memorable as "My Lovely Horse", clearly!

 

[berwicksfinest]

Sod eurovision, I reckon we should pull out and take our money with us, I'm sure NHS, or schools or maybe even a couple ot electrication stanchions are a much more worthy cause, then the can have their catwailing contest without us

 

[southern442]

Sod eurovision, I reckon we should pull out and take our money with us, I'm sure NHS, or schools or maybe even a couple ot electrication stanchions are a much more worthy cause, then the can have their catwailing contest without us

£300k is not even a drop in the ocean compared to what we spend on the NHS and schools.

 

[johncrossley]

Sod eurovision, I reckon we should pull out and take our money with us, I'm sure NHS, or schools or maybe even a couple ot electrication stanchions are a much more worthy cause, then the can have their catwailing contest without us

The BBC would have to put something else on in those three evenings. Unless you are happy with repeats, chances are the replacement programme would cost more than Eurovision. Unless you are hosting the show, Eurovision is relatively cheap because the cost is spread across many countries.

 

[berwicksfinest]

£300k is not even a drop in the ocean compared to what we spend on the NHS and schools.

Very true, but its gotta be better than handing to the shower

The BBC would have to put something else on in those three evenings. Unless you are happy with repeats, chances are the replacement programme would cost more than Eurovision. Unless you are hosting the show, Eurovision is relatively cheap because the cost is spread across many countries.

Why change the habit of a life time, some reheated programmes would hardly be a difference.

 

[southern442]

Very true, but its gotta be better than handing to the shower

Why change the habit of a life time, some reheated programmes would hardly be a difference.

I'd argue many people like Eurovision, and whilst not everyone watches it those that do take a very large amount of enjoyment from it. Same with any other show, why have x programme when you could have y programme.

 

[berwicksfinest]

I'd argue many people like Eurovision, and whilst not everyone watches it those that do take a very large amount of enjoyment from it. Same with any other show, why have x programme when you could have y programme.

Absolutely, but why couldn't Eurovision be aired without us ?? Sport can be shown without an British participent ??

 

[dgl]

I think the reason why we lose is because we think our music is still great just because it sells well, when in actual fact British music is now crap and as mass produced as it's ever been.
I like to think that one of the primary difference with us and the rest of Europe is that in the rest of Europe even the crap/novelty acts have immense amounts of talent, take Aqua for an example, they are a proper band that have produced most of their work themselves, again Infenal (from paris to berlin) are again a proper band and if you take something a but more left field like of Scooter who recorded, mixed and mastered all but the first album themselves, and countless others. Contrast that with a lot of modern UK acts who are stage managed to the highest degree with the "band" just being a front for the producers pulling all of the strings behind, they sell well because they are easy access, not due to talent.
I think "talent" shows have a lot to answer for over here as it's highly doubtful someone with real talent would go on such a program as they would have the brains to know that you are basically signing yourself and all your works away.

Also there are acts that are and have continued to be highly successful in most of Europe but have sold practically nothing over here and as such whilst we might wonder who some of the acts are they may already.

Slighty OT but I wish Germany had picked Scooter for their 2003 entry (they came second in the vote (Germany 12 Points) to find their entrant), not as different as the likes of Lordi but different enough, plus they used a decent amount of pyrotechnics!

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Sod eurovision, I reckon we should pull out and take our money with us, I'm sure NHS, or schools or maybe even a couple ot electrication stanchions are a much more worthy cause, then the can have their catwailing contest without us

How exactly would a tiny fraction of the BBC's budget magically become part of the budget for health, education, or transport? And would we even notice it?

But it would be a good slogan to paint on the side of a bus, I suppose!

 

[nlogax]

Absolutely, but why couldn't Eurovision be aired without us ?? Sport can be shown without an British participent ??

No, you're absolutely right. We should stop deriving any pleasure from Eurovision and maybe read a book or go outside instead. The idea of getting involved in and enjoying an annual televisual event is appalling.

 

[southern442]

Absolutely, but why couldn't Eurovision be aired without us ?? Sport can be shown without an British participent ??

True, but the world cup, for example, wouldn't be quite the same to us if England weren't playing.