Every country has a pre-selection program, but the rest of Europe does not hear potential songs which could have left a greater impression in the competition itself. Therefor, each and every show from all participant countries should be heard and seen throughout the continent.
There can be a national vote to select which song should represent each country, as well as a pan-European vote, thus taking into consideration what others would think about the local songs, this resulting in 2 songs advancing through to the competition proper.
The, so called, block-voting nations, like former Soviet states, Scandinavian nations and former Yugoslav countries should all be in one group when the competition's semi-finals are due, as well as in the final itself, therefor allowing only 1 (possibly 2, at the most) country to qualify for that final day of the event.
This format is based on European or World cup events, where 2 nations from a group of 4 countries (in preliminaries there might even be 6 nations) would qualify for the final. This would eliminate any obvious vote regardless of the song or performance of the respective country. The voting for this format should be submitted by the populations of the participant countries within the group only. In the final, all Europe can vote for the songs qualified.
This group stages could have various draws throughout the years, ensuring a level participation field from various nations, notwithstanding the block of countries in the end. This should make the competition more interesting, as the public would await with anticipation the pairing of nations.
Furthermore, each nation used to perform their songs in their native language, with few exceptions. These days, the exceptions should become excerpts in the format of a ticker which would come with every performance, as the singer would sing in their native language, while the subtitles would give us an idea of the song.
The live orchestra has disappeared throughout the years, and, although it might be expensive as well as time-consuming for some nations, remember the fact that it took only a conductor to come in and direct the orchestra itself, it didn't take any big musicians to come in and play from every country. Live playing is that more exciting than a playback, is it not?
The jury format for the competition should make a comeback in this way: before the European votes are to be cast, an analysis of the songs, voices and performances should be allowed, thus giving everyone a clue about what they are voting, who they are voting for with respects to all performers and singers, as well as point out true potentials, stumbles or which lyrics are to be given a greater mention.
The jury, made up of professional composers, singing coaches and past Eurovision participants, should also cast their vote. Together with the pan-European vote (50%) and the jury vote (50%) the winning song would be chosen.
The Eurovision has lost its charm, yet with this new format it would greatly improve its quality, because there's more to music than just voting, there are singers to consider for everyone, there are languages to be heard, there are cultures to be seen and be inspired by.
(this was posted on May 30th, 2008)
There can be a national vote to select which song should represent each country, as well as a pan-European vote, thus taking into consideration what others would think about the local songs, this resulting in 2 songs advancing through to the competition proper.
The, so called, block-voting nations, like former Soviet states, Scandinavian nations and former Yugoslav countries should all be in one group when the competition's semi-finals are due, as well as in the final itself, therefor allowing only 1 (possibly 2, at the most) country to qualify for that final day of the event.
This format is based on European or World cup events, where 2 nations from a group of 4 countries (in preliminaries there might even be 6 nations) would qualify for the final. This would eliminate any obvious vote regardless of the song or performance of the respective country. The voting for this format should be submitted by the populations of the participant countries within the group only. In the final, all Europe can vote for the songs qualified.
This group stages could have various draws throughout the years, ensuring a level participation field from various nations, notwithstanding the block of countries in the end. This should make the competition more interesting, as the public would await with anticipation the pairing of nations.
Furthermore, each nation used to perform their songs in their native language, with few exceptions. These days, the exceptions should become excerpts in the format of a ticker which would come with every performance, as the singer would sing in their native language, while the subtitles would give us an idea of the song.
The live orchestra has disappeared throughout the years, and, although it might be expensive as well as time-consuming for some nations, remember the fact that it took only a conductor to come in and direct the orchestra itself, it didn't take any big musicians to come in and play from every country. Live playing is that more exciting than a playback, is it not?
The jury format for the competition should make a comeback in this way: before the European votes are to be cast, an analysis of the songs, voices and performances should be allowed, thus giving everyone a clue about what they are voting, who they are voting for with respects to all performers and singers, as well as point out true potentials, stumbles or which lyrics are to be given a greater mention.
The jury, made up of professional composers, singing coaches and past Eurovision participants, should also cast their vote. Together with the pan-European vote (50%) and the jury vote (50%) the winning song would be chosen.
The Eurovision has lost its charm, yet with this new format it would greatly improve its quality, because there's more to music than just voting, there are singers to consider for everyone, there are languages to be heard, there are cultures to be seen and be inspired by.
(this was posted on May 30th, 2008)
Proposing a legislation that is bound to work against drink and drive, protecting everyone from drink and drive related accidents. The intent is to prevent the act
or stop it before it happens.
You can view the proposed legislation at http://findhere.org/aplwad
or stop it before it happens.
You can view the proposed legislation at http://findhere.org/aplwad
Proposing a bill that would make people that are dedicated 100% to their jobs, as well as those who serve with respects to their jobs angels. It is meant to give them protection, rewards and respect in exchange for their 100% commitment to their trades.
You can view more on what exactly this bill is all about at
http://findhere.org/humansasangels
You can view more on what exactly this bill is all about at
http://findhere.org/humansasangels
netvibes
RSS