14 Comments

  • Mary Strickler 3 years ago

    Julia Cavorai Are you kidding me? Smokie ??? Do you even have ears? If so you need to make an appointment for a hearing test asap!

  • Florin Dmx 3 years ago

    for us who voted italy is the winner,sweden is politics winner,i hate eurovision,i will enver watch it again,this is a scandinavian bussines,we want our money back…

  • Jibii (@Jibiikako) 3 years ago

    And also about you saying that the song is a copy of David Guetta… It is completly imposible as the song was made earlier due to the swedish Gran Prix was in 2014 before the David Guetta song was released :P

  • dennisbarvsten 3 years ago

    Where do you find that 100 000 televoters more voted for Italy? Source critizm.
    And the fact is that Oikotimes updated their article afterwards. Probably because they understood how stupid it was. They erased the fact about that the win of Sweden was a result by the EBU (a conspiracy) and subjective comments as “we all wanted Italy to win”.

  • Julia Covariu 3 years ago

    Well, I am sorry to ruin the party, but IL VOLO stole the song from Smokie’s 1976:”What can I do”…not that Sweden’s song is not pretty much inspired by all this Guetta, Avici stuff out there…just, nobody is talking about Italy, because people do not know the truth…anyway, Eurovision became a parody…enjoy the original https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0r3xvd-dloU

  • Bernard Duffy 3 years ago

    I have no idea who dennisbarvsten might be but he tries to defend the indefensible. If 100,000 televoters place a song in first place, how can five people remove it and replace it with their choice? I voted and it cost me my OWN money. I don’t think any jury member incurred any expense when casting their vote. The paying public is sovereign. We own our public broadcasting services and pay for them out of our taxes. We pay to vote by telephone. Our choice is then negated by a handful of “critics” who can pursue their own agenda and give preferential treatment to their friends. Clearly the concept of democracy is unknown to the organisers of the contest.

  • Christine Burlo 3 years ago

    I think you are 100% correct and you had the courage to bring to light certain issues , Yes Sweden won but it was ITALY/IL VOLO/ GRANDE AMORE the won the hearts of the people last night !!

  • Hans Wollstein 3 years ago

    A lot of nonsense hereabout, especially from Denisbausten. Yes, Austria won last year, but Conchita’s win would have been quite a lot bigger with only tele voting. The German 2014 jury did its best to keep Austria down after its chair person publicly derided Conchita Wurst. And so on and so forth. Here’s the deal: You cannot allow the public number one vote getter to come in a distant third. That is quite simply an untenable situation. And, in fact, a Eurovision first! I’m certainly putting pressure on my bookmaker to force EBU to change the rules yet again. What is the point of betting when some juries can completely throw out the rule books. Like the Australian jury member who yesterday morning local time bragged to Australian breakfast TV that he had A PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP with one of the Russian entry’s songwriters/backup vocalists. Guest where this particular juror placed Russia? Why, 1st. of course. Which should ban Australia from ever again competing in the EUROvision Song Contest.

  • dennisbarvsten 3 years ago

    Oikotimes, I remember when you were a serious eurovision site as Esctoday. Today you believe in conspiracies and talk crap about winning songs. That’s not professional. It might be professional to lift the split vote, but not to put your own opinion that “it’s unfair”. Then you’re not a Eurovision news site, then you’re a blog (personal opinions). You cannot say “we all wanted Italy”, you could say “many people might have wanted Italy to win” (then you’re neutral and you rule out the “all”).

    Why did we invite the combined vote? Due to neighbouring voting! Have you forgot that? The last countries awsome songs have won. Even countries like Germany and Austria have won which had a tough game back in the televoting only.

    That you believe that there’s a EBU conspiracy is just mainly weird and riddiculous. Get some proof, then accuse. Juries are private music professionells. They have nothing to do with EBU, they are appointed by every television station. A taste is different from person to person.

    • Fotis Konstantopoulos (Greece) 3 years ago

      Obviously you are unable to read what I wrote dear
      Keep your empathy for OIKOTIMES to yourself and stop making me laugh

  • famousalbanians 3 years ago

    How unfair Albania gor the 9-th place and these ****** put us in the 17?? I want my money back

  • Henrik Gustavsson 3 years ago

    it is, first, an allegation that a copy of plagiarism for the second sweden song is not a copy

  • Henrik Gustavsson 3 years ago

    it was not surprising that Sweden won the Eurovision thanks to the jury becuse the EBU deliberately put Sweden on the starting number 10, which is also after a commercial break, which is a major disadvantage.
    Jurymember will be clearly less affected by the running order because, for example commercial breaks do not exist in the dress rehearsal when the jury vote.

  • Eaftomou Krymmeno 3 years ago

    This was Gayvision … again. The winning song was an ordinary eurodance one, nothing special, although one of the two or three dance songs in the final.The singer was a handsome guy, defintely loved by the gays, whom he first labeled as some “deviations”, but ultimatley he hugged … All the artists ranked on the first three places made “universal love” gay-friendly declarations prior to the contest, while the winner made one also in front of “the Queen of Europe”, after the announcement of his victory: “No matter whom we love, we’re all heroes.” (approx)