UK entry for Eurovision 2014

Last week I was invited onto BBC Breakfast to talk about Eurovision. As soon as I announced that I was going to appear I received texts and tweets asking if I knew about the UK entry. This then turned into a rumour that I was announcing Jessie J as the UK entry for 2014! Not sure how that all started but it was hugely entertaining to say the least. 

It looks like it'll be another internal selection this year. If that's the case, then at this stage it's likely that a name will have been chosen by now. When the deal is done, BBC staff, newspapers and other media will have the name well before it is announced to prep and write the story as happened with Engelbert. Of course it all depends on whether they stick to the embargo, as we saw with Bonnie last year and Blue in 2011, everyone wants a scoop! Contrary to what many think, the BBC aren't in a blind panic and struggling for people to sing for the UK. It's just that at the minute, in January, it's not at the top of the list. That doesn't mean that things aren't moving behind the scenes. Perhaps we just need to chill a little?

I can appreciate that some people miss the build up to Eurovision since we no longer have a national final. I understand why fans are eager to know who is representing the UK and it must seem frustrating when it appears that there's a wall of silence coming from the BBC. I do think they could do more with Eurovision and could use it as a great way of launching fresh new talent as they did in 2009. I'm a realist though, these are difficult economic times and the BBC, like many other organisations, are making cuts. It's unlikely that we will see a large-scale national final for some time. Eurovision is first and foremost a television show which gets large ratings for the BBC. This is the logic behind the selection of Blue, Engelbert, Bonnie. A big name will be more likely to get bigger viewing figures on the night. Simples. Whether this is right or wrong, or translates into votes, is of course, another matter...

Openness and accountability?

After the rumours of alleged vote-rigging which emerged after the 2013 Eurovision Song Contest, the EBU launched an investigation. Today it was reported that changes to the voting procedure would take place in 2014. In a bid to make the contest more transparent, the names of each juror will be revealed as well as specific details of which countries they voted for. It appears that the EBU are taking the allegations concerning fraudulent voting seriously. Does this mean that they've uncovered something in their investigations?

Maybe, maybe not.

This isn't the first time that rumours have circulated that Eurovision has been rigged. It was alleged that the contest was fixed for Spain to win in 1968 and in the 1990s Malta faced accusations of corruption after a member of the delegation was said to have been overheard apparently offering votes in 1993. It's certainly interesting to look back at the Maltese votes in that year and indeed in 1994 and 1995; they appeared to award countries that were at the bottom of the scoreboard. Hoping that those countries might return the favour the following year, perhaps?

I welcome these changes to the voting procedure for 2014 and hope that it leads to a fairer contest in the spirit which it was intended. I do however, think that much of the hype concerning Eurovision voting is pedaled by people with an axe to grind. Take the lovely Bonnie Tyler for example, who claimed after the show that she heard Russians talking about buying votes (does she even understand Russian??) and that corruption means that artists like her have no chance. Such rumours suited Bonnie though, it's much easier to blame others than to admit that you simply weren't good enough.

One thing worth thinking about it the fact that the voting has become dull and monotonous, to the point where the semi final results are more exciting. We've not had a close contest since 2003. With nearly 40 countries voting, I think it's unlikely that we'll see a tense voting procedure in the near future.

As Stalin was rumoured to have said, it's not the voting that counts, it's who counts the votes...

Eurovision 2013: We are one?

So that's another Eurovision Song Contest over. Congratulations to Denmark on scoring their third Eurovision win. I didn't have "Only Teardrops" down as a winner but hey, what do I know? That's the trouble when you hear the songs on a loop for weeks on end; you lose all sense of perspective.

2013 was an interesting year for Eurovision. SVT scaled down the contest considerably, in terms of budget, size and spectacle. It was no Moscow or Baku. Malmo was simple yet effective and the Swedes proved that you don't need to splash the cash in order to produce a slick television show. The venue for the 2013 contest, the Malmo Arena, was particularly cosy, so much so that the press centre next door appeared to be larger! Before the recession hit, it seemed that almost every country hosted a party, in 2013 there were fewer and they were certainly more stringent. I was fortunate to be invited to a reception by the Georgian Ambassador. It was a lovely afternoon of fine music, cuisine, culture and yes, wine. My experience of Georgians at Eurovision has always been a positive one, they are by far the friendliest delegation and it is always a pleasure being in their company. I would dearly love Georgia to win Eurovision, it would be truly fascinating to see them stage the contest and of course to visit the country.

Georgia is an emerging democracy and as such, at times, there are difficulties, as with any other country undergoing radical social, economic and political change. On May 17 it was reported that there was violent protests in the captial Tblisi against gay rights activists. Given that the country is keen to join the EU, this is a worrying turn of events. As the BBC report highlights, this wasn't a far-right mob, these were ordinary people who fear the unknown. This is when events like Eurovision are all the more powerful, and all the more important. My friend Monty wrote an excellent piece on the LGBT relationship with Eurovision last week.

Last year there were calls for Eurovision to be boycotted, that Azerbaijan is a regime country and that by attending the event journalists and fans were merely feeding into government propaganda. I went to the country and experienced life there, first-hand. Yes argubably it was the side of Azerbaijan that the authorities wanted us to see, but still, I asked those important questions. I met with activists from the group Sing For Democracy and learned a lot about life in the country. I didn't live in a bubble as some fans have stated. It is interesting to note that those acitivists and critics of the government in Azerbaijan did not want people to stay away; they wanted us to come to the country, to ask questions and to shine a spotlight on Azerbaijan's political situation. Eurovision was the only opportunity for this to happen which it why it was so important that the event went ahead.

I spoke to some fans of the contest in Sweden who were appalled at the events unfolding in Georgia and one even appeared to be outraged that I could consider going there. Change takes time and yet it can also happen rapidly, as recent developments in the UK have shown. In ten years we've gone from gays being banned from the military and Section 28 to full equality even in terms of marriage. Much of my research has focussed on Estonia and this is a place of truly inspiring change. In Estonia, little over ten years ago, there were serious safety concerns over the decision to hold a gay rights march in Tallinn. Activists were threatened and attacked, the same is true of Riga too. Fast forward to 2013, Estonia is a full and equal member of the EU, it's basically a smaller version of Finland. The other week, in the tabloid newspaper, Őhtuleht, there was a debate about sending an openly gay athlete to the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sotchi. As the newspaper article stated in the opening paragraph "Russia is a homophobic state". As contentious as this statement might be, the fact is that a tabloid has spoken out against homophobia. This change wasn't due to Eurovision of course but events such as Eurovision shine a spotlight onto countries and allow them to be scrutinised like never before. Estonia has changed, but it changed with dialogue. Dismissal does not work. This is why I am supportive of Georgia hosting Eurovision one day. It's far too simplistic to just write a place off and too often smacks of western double standards. Many British people are all too quick to point the finger at countries which are apparently homophobic and yet they'll go on holiday to Dubai and to Egypt, where it's actually illegal to be gay.

As my good friend Zuly pointed out in a recent discussion, why when we are talking about human rights abuses do we only talk about a select few countries? Europe is a big place. Ok on BBC Three I discussed the situation in Belarus, because it was relevant at that point in time. However what about the rise of fascism across the EU, which at times, has appeared to go relatively unchallenged? The poor human rights records in some countries actively benefits the business interests of others; namely the west. Look at oil-rich Azerbaijan and the Arab states and the amount of British investers and holidaymakers. Look at the sweatshops used by high street retailers; we are shocked when factories collapse and people are killed and yet turn a blind eye if it means we get cheap socks. I am just as guilty. Let's not forget that there are allegations of human rights abuses in the UK too. We need to look a little bit closer to home.

So what does all this mean for Eurovision? Well the 2013 slogan, We Are One", fashioned the continent as united. In fact, we aren't one. We aren't one economically, politically or as the case of Georgia shows, socially. However neither is the EU, despite all member states signing up to the same basic values. Whilst for that moment in time, we were one, watching Eurovision together, we were all sitting in very different living rooms. The developments in Georgia show how much gay people in particular take for granted their basic freedoms which were hard won. It also highlights a need for the Georgian authorities to prove that they can protect all sectors of society, particularly if they are serious about joining the EU.

The voting in the contest this year also appears to be particularly controversial which allegations of vote-rigging by several countries. The EBU need to take these allegations seriously. There can be no whitewash as there was in 2009 after the voting scandal in Azerbaijan. It's interesting that Azeri President Aliyev has ordered an investigation into why his country did not vote for Russia in the final, Belarus' President Lukashenko has also waded in complaining that he believes the results to be falsified. This, coming from a man alleged to have rigged elections for years... Meanwhile in Baku three people have been jailed for an alleged terror plot on Eurovision last year. The EBU keep insisting that Eurovision is not political, however, politics clearly does come into it, whether they like it or not.

As for the results. It was an interesting year given that not a single Former Yugoslav country qualified to the final for the first time since 1993. Belgium and the Netherlands, who haven't fared so well over the past decade or so, returned to form. Norway returned to the top five for the first time since their 2009 victory and Italy continued their strong run in the contest since returning in 2011. Hard luck on the UK's Bonnie Tyler, she was a great ambassador for the UK. Ultimately though, as with last year, what works on paper doesn't translate into votes. The BBC need to have a long think about what it is they want from Eurovision.

Thanks to everyone who made Eurovision in Sweden a terrific experience, thank you especially to the BBC team who despite popular opinion, do work extremely hard when it comes to Eurovision. Better luck next year to the UK and of course, Georgia!

Whilst it might be a quiet season for Eurovision over the summer, it's going to be a busy one for me as I try and finish my book, based on my PhD. Will keep you posted!

The Big Review (39) United Kingdom

Last but certainly not least, it's my own country, the United Kingdom. Last time Eurovision was in Malmo, the UK team were greeted with a banner which read "Welcome Untied Kingdom". With a referendum on Scottish independence looming, that statement could still stand! After taking a gamble last year with Engelbert Humperdinck, the BBC have chosen another seasoned performer to represent them in Eurovision, Bonnie Tyler. Bonnie is of course a well-known act with massive hits under her belt. Those hits were nearly thirty years ago though. "Believe In Me" is a nice song, I like it a lot and it will certainly do better then "Love Will Set You Free" (it can't do much worse!) I just don't know if this is instant or impactful enough to capture those important votes. In a funny twist of fate, by entering Eurovision, Bonnie follows in the footsteps of Nicki French, who had a big hit with "Total Eclipse of the Heart" and represented the UK in 2000. I'd like to see the UK on the left-hand side of the scoreboard. If "Believe in Me" makes the top ten I'll be surprised (and of course delighted!) If Bonnie flops then I think it's time the BBC had a re-think about what they're going to do in 2014 and also ask themselves what it is that they actually want from the contest. Loreen proved last year that the Eurovision tag is not a barrier to having an international hit (#3 in the UK!) and perhaps we should try and send something a little more relevant to the UK music scene in future. Still, "Believe in Me" is a nice song and I wish Bonnie well. She comes across as a nice lady in interviews and given that I live in Cardiff, it's nice to have a Welsh act representing the UK. Go Bonnie!

A total eclipse of the scoreboard or are we holding out for a zero?

It was meant to be announced on March 18 but hey, never trust the press to keep a secret. Yes Bonnie Tyler is off to Sweden and to Eurovision to fly the flag for the UK! I have mixed feelings about this. I do like Bonnie and I do like her songs. However I can't help feeling that what looks good on paper doesn't necessarily translate into votes.

 

Bonnie is an established artist with a proud career and extensive back catalogue. She's still touring Europe today (she's in Germany just now) and arguably she's a legend. However the same could be said for Engelbert Humperdinck who represented the UK in 2012. It was an inspired choice that didn't quite work. I have a horrible feeling that we're heading the same way in 2013.

 

I do like Bonnie's song, it's nice. However, "nice" doesn't scream winner. I really do hope the UK does well but at the minute it's looking like we're heading for a mid-table finish at best. The UK has a love-hate relationship with Eurovision. Why would a current and contemporary act put themselves up for judgement on the Eurovision stage? Adele doesn't need to. Neither do Take That. Where as Blue and Engelbert had nothing to lose. The same can be said for Bonnie. The difference is that other artists in the contest view the event as "everything to gain". That difference is crucial and has come to really put the UK and the BBC in a bit of a trap.

 

Still, it could have been worse. I was fearing it would be Kimberley Walsh who showed that performing under pressure wasn't her strong point if the National Television Awards are anything to go by! Bonnie does have stage presence and charisma. This is important at Eurovision. You can have a dull song and yet sell it to the viewers in a way which translates into votes. The UK have indeed polished turds! Michael Ball, Sonia and more recently Jade Ewen have shown that it comes down to the performance on the night. In the case of contemporary Eurovision, that includes the Friday night dress rehearsal performance on which the juries cast their vote. Blue and Engelbert just weren't up to it on the Friday night. Let's hope that Bonnie is!

 

A lot of the rhetoric concerning Eurovision in the UK is reflective of wider discourse concerning the EU and Britain's place in Europe more generally; peripheral and distant. Accusations that Eurovision voting is "political" betrays the truth of the matter, bloc voting has always existed and the UK and Ireland are just as guilty as everyone else.

 

Eurovision has changed. The contest is has doubled in size and the truth is that the UK has not kept up with these changes. I applauded the BBC's decision to use an internal selection in 2011, I believed that the public were guilty of choosing songs they thought were "very Eurovision" when in fact Eurovision has perhaps moved on. Yes there will always be novelty songs but there are also some pretty credible acts and entries which is all too often forgotten. Sweden's Loreen proved that Eurovision still has the capacity to generate international hits. It even reached number three in the UK! Where was The Hump? Number 60.

 

The risk this year is that we're entering an act and song which again is out of sync with not only the UK charts but also the European music scene. Eurovision is first and foremost a television show. The BBC want viewers. Does it matter if the UK does badly? Not really. However as long as this attitude continues the less chance there is of popular, current acts coming forward to take part in the contest. Perhaps it's time for a re-think.

 

Germany have shown that it's possible for a Big Five country to win. Germany aren't exactly the most popular country in Europe! I hope I am proved wrong, I hope Bonnie does well for the UK and of course I'll be cheering her on with word and gesture. In a nice twist of fate, the first UK entrant I met, Nicki French (UK 2000) scored a massive global hit with a dance version of "Total Eclipse of the Heart" and yet here is Bonnie, the original singer of that song, following in Nicki's footsteps. As Terry Wogan said of Nicki in 2000, "let's cheer her on with word and gesture".