I disagree that it's about a popular artist. Do I think we deserved last? No. But after practically a DECADE of the most safe and uninteresting numbers (Electro Velvet aside and I mean, we've got to do better than THAT) - something has really got to f***ing change. Duncan Laurence is a prime example of what we need and CAN do. He didn't write this song for Eurovision, he'd have had this song in his arsenal regardless. You're not telling me there's nobody out there in the UK penning something of absolutely no interest.

 

I'm really not sure what the answer is anymore but the results we're getting aren't entirely unfair. The team have got to do something about it because there can't be another decade ahead of complete no hopers like we've had for way, way, way too long.

I think what the UK needs more than anything is an actual artist. The main difference I noticed between the UK and everyone else this year wasn't the quality of the song but the obvious lack of authenticity in it compared to the rest of the competition. Bops can just be bops, but when you send a ballad I really don't think you can afford it being inauthentic unless you've got Russia-tier staging. I'm sure a lot of the people in this contest were singing songs that were written for them but they were all at least able to sell the song as being theirs or as meaning something to them (and this is especially important with ballads). Michael's song was easily the most autopilot ballad of the contest lyrically and there was just no reason to find it credible. I know it sounds kind of pretentious but ballads are meant to touch people and I'm not sure if something as emotionally wooden as 'Bigger Than Us' actually can. You could feel the sadness in Duncan and the force of will in Tamara, but Michael just looked like ... a guy singing a song he was told to sing.

 

It does make me wonder if the UK's musical culture being tempered so heavily by the dominance of X Factor in recent decades has caused the UK to disconnect heavily from the rest of Europe in what it wants from musical contest performers. Authenticity and artistry seems extremely undervalued in the UK's Eurovision selection process compared to very mathematical song choices (key changes and money notes can make up for anything!) and someone being able to adlib effectively in a final chorus. When you look at the songs that do well in Eurovision, the priorities are jarringly different to those of the UK. Maybe it's that the contest's reputation is so toxic that actual artists are unreachable for the UK's delegation, but that's something that needs fixing if so.

The 3 points for the UK in the televote came from Ireland.

The UK was far from the worst and really didnt think it deserved last or near it either.

"Far from" is debatable?

I think what the UK needs more than anything is an actual artist. The main difference I noticed between the UK and everyone else this year wasn't the quality of the song but the obvious lack of authenticity in it compared to the rest of the competition. Bops can just be bops, but when you send a ballad I really don't think you can afford it being inauthentic unless you've got Russia-tier staging. I'm sure a lot of the people in this contest were singing songs that were written for them but they were all at least able to sell the song as being theirs or as meaning something to them (and this is especially important with ballads). Michael's song was easily the most autopilot ballad of the contest lyrically and there was just no reason to find it credible. I know it sounds kind of pretentious but ballads are meant to touch people and I'm not sure if something as emotionally wooden as 'Bigger Than Us' actually can. You could feel the sadness in Duncan and the force of will in Tamara, but Michael just looked like ... a guy singing a song he was told to sing.

 

It does make me wonder if the UK's musical culture being tempered so heavily by the dominance of X Factor in recent decades has caused the UK to disconnect heavily from the rest of Europe in what it wants from musical contest performers. Authenticity and artistry seems extremely undervalued in the UK's Eurovision selection process compared to very mathematical song choices (key changes and money notes can make up for anything!) and someone being able to adlib effectively in a final chorus. When you look at the songs that do well in Eurovision, the priorities are jarringly different to those of the UK. Maybe it's that the contest's reputation is so toxic that actual artists are unreachable for the UK's delegation, but that's something that needs fixing if so.

 

Spot on. I had this concern from the minute we unveiled the format of this year's You Decide, nothing good will come from pairing the singer with an already written song they have no connection to, not the way the UK does it. We seem to treat music contests as this vehicle for what actually are human interest stories paired with corporate hype machines. Sob stories, manufactured boy/girl groups, etc. The music rarely matters in these shows beyond 'that sounds nice', no matter how they dress it up, and it's made us, overall, excellent at handing off songs for unknowns to cover. Which doesn't work in a contest where lots of countries are sending a hot new pop star, or better yet, a musical performer who's built a career out of making their music more important than their persona. The UK's hopefuls have too often come in doing it the other way around... and their persona is also bland and unmemorable.

The 3 points for the UK in the televote came from Ireland.

 

:wub:

 

Ireland saving us from the same statement Germany got in the televoting.... “Sorry, you got no points”

Ya that was harsh for Germany, even if they only got 1 point.

We say the same thing every year and the BBC still send a completely bland song with uninspiring lyrics. Bigger Than Us is the ultimate version of that, the lyrics are so utterly basic, it’s not grabbing anyones attention no matter how good the singer is.

 

Like the Brexit deal, nothing will change.

We seem to love sending songs that mention hands, togetherness and storms.

I think both Ireland and the UK tackle the Eurovision the same way and are behind the times and the results for both in the last 20 years overall show that.

Yeah, this was so basic.

People remember the good and the bad, no one remembers the forgettable. Hence why this flopped.

At least the UK public have a say in who goes forward and there is an event around it where in Ireland the song is just picked but after this years shockingly bad result I'm hoping that will change as coming last in a semi final is a very bad result as we were last by a fair bit.

At least the UK public have a say in who goes forward and there is an event around it where in Ireland the song is just picked but after this years shockingly bad result I'm hoping that will change as coming last in a semi final is a very bad result as we were last by a fair bit.

Yet they still hate their song :lol:

We have a say in picking the best bland song from a bunch of even more forgettable bland songs.

 

Have you not heard the songs we’re offered each year?!

I genuinely preferred the period earlier this decade when the British entry wasn't the end result of an amateur hour X-Factor (with all the awful tendencies that the British voting public tend to have) and was just an artist that the BBC kept under wraps until late in the process. Public choice has very little bearing in how we do continent-wide.

We have a say in picking the best bland song from a bunch of even more forgettable bland songs.

 

Have you not heard the songs we’re offered each year?!

The songs I know could be better but at least there is an event but I do see what you are saying. Both just need to find better songs, and I think more and more writers from other countries will be getting there songs selected as many good song writers dont want to touch Eurovision. In the rest of Europe it seems to be the opposite. People can still get a career out of eurovision.

I disagree that it's about a popular artist. Do I think we deserved last? No. But after practically a DECADE of the most safe and uninteresting numbers (Electro Velvet aside and I mean, we've got to do better than THAT) - something has really got to f***ing change. Duncan Laurence is a prime example of what we need and CAN do. He didn't write this song for Eurovision, he'd have had this song in his arsenal regardless. You're not telling me there's nobody out there in the UK penning something of absolutely no interest.

 

I'm really not sure what the answer is anymore but the results we're getting aren't entirely unfair. The team have got to do something about it because there can't be another decade ahead of complete no hopers like we've had for way, way, way too long.

Exactly! We could send a popular artist but if it's a song as uninspiring as the likes of Bigger Than Us and Storm, there's no point. Lucie Jones was a step in the right direction, a bit more of an atmospheric and dramatic ballad, but the UK has such a great music scene and we just pluck whichever randomer will sing an average, safe song. I mean safe isn't doing so badly for Sweden for example, but we don't send safe radio hits or anything, it's just usually the lowest common denominator of slightly "inspirational" inoffensive song that nobody will hate but also nobody will particularly be enamoured by.

The problem is that the BBC are looking for a "Eurovision song" and not just any song. They're ticking boxes - inspirational lyrics, key change, big ballad - that fit Eurovision's vibe. Compare it to Arcade - that's a well-written, powerful, impactful song that Duncan would have released regardless. It's not forced and it's not insincere, and that's the massive difference. If we can stop trying too hard and send a pretty natural and relatively distinctive song, that's half the job done already.

The problem is that the BBC are looking for a "Eurovision song" and not just any song. They're ticking boxes - inspirational lyrics, key change, big ballad - that fit Eurovision's vibe. Compare it to Arcade - that's a well-written, powerful, impactful song that Duncan would have released regardless. It's not forced and it's not insincere, and that's the massive difference. If we can stop trying too hard and send a pretty natural and relatively distinctive song, that's half the job done already.

 

I agree with your points and it's well said.

 

Honestly, the first thing I would do for 2020 is scrap the National Final/Songwriting Camp set up because, save for the occaisional gem like 'Legends', all it will ever produce is bland "by committee" Eurovision songs performed by "plucky amateurs" and occaisionally you'll come across a Lucie Jones who can sell a sub-par song within an inch of its life but if that's the highest you're aiming for it's the highest you'll get.

 

Netherlands just clocking up their win makes me think we either have to do the Dutch 2013 onwards approach of just picking someone who's got a proven career in Music and just leave them alone to make a 3 minute song and submit that or alternatively go with the Portugal approach and just go for something weird/unique/hipster and build Eurovision up to get it credibility from the music industry and let the chips fall wherever they do. But key to both of those approaches is leaving the musicians to take care of the music and leave the television side (commentary, promo ect) to the BBC.

 

Sophie Ellis-Bextor had to pull out of being on the jury this year, I'd say she ought to be the first number in the BBC's phonebook!