Whatever happened to scaling down?

Apart from the actual competition, one of the big things that was unveiled and discussed in Baku 2012 was the new EBU approach towards the size of the ESC and the now clearly pronounced goal to scale down the event and make it more sustainable financially, ecologically and - basically - in every thinkable way.

This new plan of course sprung from the recent financial crisis that left a number of countries almost unable to take part in the ESC due to the heavy costs, not to mention it would be virtually impossible for many countries to host a contest that kept on growing and growing. More entries, more journalists, more delegates, bigger venues. Unsustainable in the long run. Like the Olympics.

Next year, SVT was the perfect pupil that played along with the new guidelines. Instead of the huge new arena in Stockholm, they opted for a much smaller venue in Malmö and other steps were taken to reduce the number of accreditations at least a bit.

Since then, we haven't seen much of this ambitious plan. Denmark decided to renovate an old warehouse in the middle of nowhere - not an inexpensive stunt - and even if the venues selected in 2015 and 2016 were no huge at least they showed no signs of the event getting smaller.

Fast forward to 2017, where one of the big financial contributors suddenly decides to use the upcoming final in Kyiv as a tool to push their own agenda. Russia was given a lot of space to challenge a perfectly reasonable piece of Ukrainian legislation and the supposed reason the EBU was so understanding was of course the large participation fee paid by Russian television.

Another reason to reboot the process of scaling down the Eurovision Song Contest is of course to be less dependent on individual participating countries. The EBU insists that the ESC is an nonpolitical event, but in order to be that it must also be independent and able to stand up and talk back whenever someone is using their money to push a political agenda into the event.

If the event was smaller and had a smaller budget, then it would be easier to tell a single participant to drop out instead of making trouble as their absence would leave a smaller hole in the overall budget. That shouldn't sound too bad to an apolitical broadcasting union.

Not to mention that it would be easier for Malta, Cyprus or FYR Macedonia to host the thing should they finally win.

40 years ago today: Karin Falck lit up the screen

Forty years can be a very long time. In my childhood, the second world war was vaguely forty years ago while the moon landing was only some twenty years away.

Exactly 40 years ago today, on March 22nd 1975, Sweden hosted its first ever Eurovision Song Contest and when you look back at the show forty years will indeed feel like an eternity. It's a completely different world. Television was almost like a different medium.

If you compare what Stockholm offered viewers worldwide compared to the contests held the year before and the year after, you might get an idea of the difficult position Swedish television (not yet the SVT we know today, still a sub-division of Swedish radio) found itself in: it must be good enough to meet international standards but still rigid enough not to give people the idea that huge amounts of money was wasted on something as ridiculous as entertainment.

However, one special effect makes this contest stand out in a very positive light: the sheer super power that is Karin Falck.

Copyright: SVT

Karin was a huge star in Swedish television - arguably the biggest female tv star in the history of Swedish broadcasting. She had a finger in every pie there was as a beloved host as well as a very nifty producer with an endless list of successes on her list.

She had also recently become a widow after her husband Åke Falck's untimely death in 1974 - also he was a top name in Swedish tv and the couple worked intensively together - and the top bosses thought an important task like hosting the ESC would keep Karin active and going.

Karin kept going alright. Perhaps languages skills were not her top asset, and possibly the opening of the show is a bit shaky - rumours had it her running entrance was due to colleagues literally having to push her onto stage - but once the professional in her woke up, she never lost control.

She lost her scripts, surely. Some of her quotes have become legendary and rightly so. During the voting she says fantastic things like "Seven? How much is that in France?" or "Could we have seven points on the Turkey?" but these are just glorious bi-products of a professional woman improvising her way through a language she isn't all that familiar with.



If you look at her determination instead: how steadily she makes her way through the show, how she always knows where she is going and how she never loses her temper or gets stressed. She keeps beaming like the sun throughout the entire voting - not something every host has managed to do through the years.

At the end of the show, she announces the Dutch team as winners and wraps the whole show up, still with the biggest of smiles, and ends with a few words in French: "Quelque part au fond de nous, nous serons toujours ensemble" - Somewhere inside of us, we will always be together - a greeting to her late husband Åke Falck.



Eurovision Song Contest 1975

You can win, but can you host?

Winning the Eurovision Song Contest was always a slightly sweaty affair since a victory also gave you the responsibility to host next year's event as well. More challenging for some than for others, but not effortless for anyone.

I was really happy when, in Baku 2012, the EBU finally put their foot down and said they wanted the event to grow smaller in coming years. Smaller venues, fewer delegates and less money spent. Partially due to the financial situation in Europe, of course. It doesn't look good that obscene amounts of money are spent on a tv-show as people struggle to get by in their everyday lives.

But a smaller format for Eurovision also makes it possible for more countries to host. There is already the requirement that any host city must be able to offer a certain amount of quality hotel rooms (the figure 3000 comes to mind but I'm not sure it's correct), which already makes it really hard for some countries to host.

Are we ready to make some sacrifices for a good cause? Could we content ourselves with a lower standard of hotels? With a considerably smaller venue? With a considerably lower amount of accreditations given out? For one year?

Or do we have to just face the music and realise that if some countries win, they will probably not be able to host? Countries like Iceland, Slovenia, Cyprus? Could Malta pull it off? Or this year's bookmaker favourite Armenia?

For me, the Eurovision Song Contest is - and should be - one of the biggest unifying factors in Europe that make countries come together and feel equal. What happens to that idea if a number of participants are already out of the running in advance?

I can just imagine the outcry in 2006 if Finland - after finally winning on its 40th attempt - would have been deemed to small to host and the EBU would have handed the honour to, say, Germany instead. An anticlimax like that is nothing I would wish any participating country, really.

I hope we can see finals in Reykjavík, Ljubljana, Valletta in the future, even if they are smaller than the ones we have grown used to. In the end, the most important aspect should be that the final product looks good on television anyway.

ESC 2014: Let's scale a bit further!

Tastes differ, but I know for sure I thoroughly enjoyed the new scaled-down version of the Eurovision Song Contest presented by SVT this year. The smaller venue makes for a more intimate feel, the audience comes closer to the performers and the cameras surely came closer as well.

The camera work was accurate, tight and brought about a warmth that has been missing in some of the bigger arenas.

I really think this is the way to go - a more humane and warmer event is what Europe needs rather than a glossy but cold production. I hope DR will continue and try to stick to the same idea and find new ways of downshifting.

Unless something radical happens in the world - like the end of the financial crisis, for instance - and countries start streaming back into the ESC en masse, I would have another suggestion.

26 songs in the final actually does feel a bit much. I'm a huge eurofan but I feel that it is hard to digest and compare that many songs at once. How will the general audience feel, then?

If the number of participating countries for 2014 will be forty or less, I suggest it is time to scale the final down a bit. I have been thinking about it for quite some time already and when one of my regular readers mentioned similar thoughts in a comment, I think maybe I'm not all wrong.

If we would have eight qualifiers per semi final instead, that would bring the number of finalists down to 22 - just like it was back in the late 80's. Twenty-two is a number you can handle and it would free up quite a lot of time in the show as well. There would be more time for the host broadcaster to leave their own mark on the show and yet the voting would avoid feeling rushed or stressful.

This year, eight finalists per semi would have meant some of my personal favourites would have missed the final - most notably Estonia and Finland - but it would have given Petra Mede more time to breathe during the voting sequence.

If a drop down to 22 feels too dramatic, then have nine qualifiers per semi and make it 24 finalists. It would already be better.

It would make it a bit harder to qualify, but if it could enhance the most important product of the Eurovision factory - the Saturday night final - then be it. I think the EBU should have a look into it. For the sake of more accessible watching.

No polite points for the host

Back in the day, there was this idea that the host country automatically recieved a bucket full of complimentary points regardless of what their entry sounded like. Politeness points.

I'm not so sure about that, honestly. Wouldn't the host countries win a whole lot more often, then? In the 57 contests to date, only six occasions saw the host entry win.

In some years, the home ground entries have not exactly been drowned in points. Like in Bergen in 1986, where Norway didn't really make a splash.



Ketil Stokkan - Romeo (Norway 1986) - 12th place of 20

When Ireland first organised Eurovision back in 1971 - and went colour just for the occasion - the panel of expert jurors showed no excessive politeness anyway.



Angela Farrell - One Day Love (Ireland 1971) - 11th place of 18

Latvia had a very promising start at Eurovision and hosted the 2003 ESC in Riga, where their own act were red hot favourites to secure them a second consecutive victory. Those predictions proved a bit on the positive side and in the end, the Latvians only recieved a modest five points, all awarded by neighbour Estonia.



F.L.Y - Hello From Mars (Latvia 2003) - 24th place of 26

Swedish eurovision general was - as you all know - a contestant at the 1992 ESC in Malmö and was the opposite of a hit with the juries. Maybe he sees this year's event - hosted in his city of defeat - as a revenge for the second last place he got back then? Hopefully the 2013 Swedish entrant Robin Stjernberg will have more understanding from Europe this time around.



Christer Björkman - Imorgon är en annan dag (Sweden 1992) - 22nd place of 23

At least he should avoid the fate of the 1958 Dutch entry - the only time in history that the host country ended in the very last place.



Corry Brokken - Heel de wereld (Netherlands 1958) - Equal 9th place of 10

ESC 2013: roll on Petra Mede

Eurovision week has started for real and I guess there is a fair amount of nerves at the SVT headquarters by now. All these preparations for such a long time and now it is time to show the critical audience what they came up with.

Will people love the stage design? The camera work? The post cards? The interval act? You never know how things like these will land with a large, diverse audience.

However, I am pretty sure you will all enjoy the presence of Petra Mede. She is glamourous, she is composed, she is funny and she is fluent in French.

Armed with a good script - one that is funny when the show allows it rather than trying to be funny the entire time - this could indeed go down very well.

Just like at Petra's big break - hosting Melodifestivalen back in 2009. Also then, Petra co-operated with Edward af Sillén. This looks very promising indeed.



Petra Mede - highlights from Melodifestivalen 2009

Bulgaria: Good evening, Orlin

I have missed the entire Bulgarian final, and came in late to see if there was a quick recap. It came eventually (and surprised me as the 23 entries had been reduced to 19), but before that it was very nice seeing Orlin Pavlov again.

Tonight, he is hosting and providing the interval act. Back in 2005, he was the first to defend the Bulgarian banner as lead singer of the group Kaffe.



Kaffe - Lorraine (Bulgaria 2005)

This entry was far from globally appreciated back then, but I grew to like during the week in Kyiv and above all Orlin stood out as a very good vocalist.

Apparently, he is still successful on home ground, now as a solo singer. The song he sang in the interval act seems to have been a hit. Is there anyone out there who knows more about Orlin Pavlov and his career developments?

I wouldn't mind seeing him back for Bulgaria. 2012, perhaps?



Orlin Pavlov - Chicago