Eurovision song contest – An Unused Frequency

No one is immune to propaganda, and all artistic expression is inherently political. These are two statements to keep in mind, as we approach this year’s eurovision song contest, and examine what choices were made, and which were not. There is much we can learn, simply from the roster of this year’s competition, as well as what arguments have been used where.

Each message has a meaning, and a purpose, even if that purpose is to have no meaning. This is particularly true in the measured and planned messages that are art, public speaking and entertainment. Deliberate choices have led to this year’s European Song Contest looking the way it does. Many are aesthetic, or economical, or even made due to crass necessity, but all of them were made in a direct or indirect political context.

Russia has been excluded from the ESC due to their invasion of Ukraine, and been condemned for their war crimes against the people of Ukraine. The exclusion is an act that is hard to see as anything but political. Israel, another state that has invaded its neighbor, and committed well documented war crimes against its civilian population has been allowed to participate on the basis that The Eurovision contest. This decision has loudly been defended on the base that the ESC has is, and has always been an apolitical contest.

But, keep in mind what I mentioned before, with this statement in mind about messages and art. Is it possible to have an apolitical musical competition, especially one that has as many politically charged entries as the ESC. I want to argue in this text that there is a distinct difference between apoliticality and politics so agreed upon it becomes invisible. Expected truths, the statue que, and ofcourse, successful propaganda are often seen as apolitical, but are in fact, simply invisible.

In Sweden the ESC is exclusively played on SVT, Sweden’s state television, as is the national competition leading up to the ESC. The competition is touted and lauded as the people’s contest, by everyone and for everyone. Is it then possible to understand the directions that are made in the name of the ESC as anything other than political? To be of the people, and indirectly, of the nation, is to be explicitly political.

I would argue that it is easy to see things that we agree with as apolitical, especially if these things happen to fall within the purview of the statue que. Media becomes political in the mind of many viewers once it expresses opinions or emotions that goes against this status quo, or for that matter when the nature of the subject as political becomes unavoidable, or impossible to ignore.

Representation of minorities, such as POCs and queer individuals is a good example of this phenomenon. Their absence is part of the status quo and as a result, not political, and their inclusion, as a result is. This would be a great example of subtle biases, of expectations and what breaks with these expectations. For a long time have the explicit or implicit exclusion of the queer community been almost a given, at least until the monetary value of these groups became apparent. The same exclusion has been, until fairly recently, set on Russia and many of the former eastern bloc countries, on the not so subtle grounds on political affiliations with the former USSR.

The Russian revolution was clearly done on explicitly political grounds. More precisely as a punishment and statement of Russia’s invasion of their neighbor Ukraine. This is an invention that has recently been subtly reframed to be an Unlawful invasion, in contrast to Israel’s Lawful retaliations against Gaza.

This distinction makes Israel’s war seem, part of the common narrative in the west, as a simple fight against evil insurgents. The decision to include them seems to be apolitical as a result, while Russia’s actions so infidelity aberrant, and their exclusion as apolitical, or at least, understandably political.

Apoliticallity is always a choice, and it is a choice that very few of us have the privilege to make. Keep in mind that if a subject seems apolitical to you, it is more than often that you are blessed to not experience the negative part of said topic. Propaganda and bias is a lot easier to miss, if you have the option to be blind to the problem to begin with.

Melodifestivalen is the Swedish regional part of the eurovision song contest. Here is where Sweden’s representation is chosen in a several week long media spectacle. Seeing how this is the Swedish broadcast networks (SVT) biggest crowd pusher of the year, it is no surprise that the company wants to get as much out of it as possible. This can be most easily seen by the extension of the contest that has happened over the many years of its run.

Melodifestivalen is one of, if not The must see television show on Swedish TV. This can come from genuine enjoyment, scorn, an unwillingness to miss out, or a combination of all the above. In this essay I will use the series as a way to deconstruct two major themes that can be found in many of SVTs productions. One being that of a sense of ego and inflated importance, as well as a sense of entitlement to lowered standards. There is this air of SVT productions that are expected to be measured with a lower standard because they are “just public television”. I will in this essay aim to discuss how these two modes of thinking often contradict each other.

Low standard and the sense of being “just SVT” is something that is easy to spot in the production of Melodifestivalen. Despite being played in a grand arena, having a grand budget, almond raking in millions of views, is it always a sense of amateurish feeling over the production and script writing of the show itself. The jokes are corny and not very well thought out, the presenters give off the feeling of uncomfortable convention hosts. Many of the jokes that are pulled from this real or perceived amateurishness, like the ironic use of comic sans, or the fact that a joke did not land, being the punchline to the joke more often than not.

This is not an opinion I am alone with, and as I have alluded to, are there many that watch the show to groan at the bad jokes and corny performances, as well as the often sadly misguided musical performances. This is a fact that SVT is well aware of, and has on more than one occasion made light of in their comedy often at the expense of their detractors.

A good example of this is the year that SVT used muppets to present their different viewers and their reason to watch. One pair of these puppets being an elderly, upper class and intellectual couple that watched the show seemingly in pure duress, and spent the entire show berating and degrading it. This would have been a fine thing to do, even though the Muppets did it first and better with the peanut gallery, if it wasn’t for the fact that the old couple that “just didn’t get it”, were always right!

This attitude of casually dismissing criticism as overly intellectual snobs is something that can be found in other productions then just Melodifestivalen. Many of their shows like Uti Bugda and similar comedy show as a distinct lowbrow, and yet mean spirited tone towards their perceived audience. This is furthermore followed by yet again a notion that any low production values or bad quality from their part should be forgiven due to their state of public television, and as a result, not as fancy as commercial television.

SVT was, for a long time the only television that was available for the Swedish population, as the first and only tv channel made in, and for Sweden. They were from the beginning, and still are fully funded by Swedish tax money, and operate, at least in theory, fully free from both government and commercial interest. SVT is considered to be a public service, much like the BBC in the UK, and as a result is meant to work in service of the public. This project involves trying to cater to as wide an audience as possible, and to make sure to give something for everyone, or in other words, for the general public. This runs the gambit from low brow comedy shows, to high concept discussion shows on art, faith and science. In later years has this responsibility been spread over several channels where SVT 1 remained the most focused towards, in lack of a better word, mass audiences, where SVT2, Knowledge channel, and the SVT kids taking over many of the more specialized roles. It is not perhaps surprising that Melodifestivalen is hosted only at SVT 1. This sense of being in the service to the public, as well as being the first TV channel available has, I would argue, led to an elevated sense of importance amongst the executives of SVT.

SVT today does not exist alone. And for decades they have now had to contend with the competition of other, nonprofit and for profit TV stations and conglomerates, and it is in this relationship that both of their self images can be found and understood. On one end does SVT tout their role as, free (in a way) entertainment, education and culture for the public. That they serve a higher purpose than the commercial TV stations as their role as public services. On the other hand does it also seem to exist a certain defensiveness in SVTs many shows about, not being able to, and in fact, that they should not be expected to be as good as the big commercial stations with their enormous budgets and talent pools.

Nowhere else I would argue, is this dichotomy more apparent, then in the case of Melodifestivalen. There is a grand sense of being the People’s entertainment festival, and there is indeed in theory possible for anyone to join and possibly win the entire contest. There is a sense that SVT is almost doing the nation a service by providing the Swedish people of something to gather around, be proud of, and more importantly then all, to take part in, And yes, here I have to give credit where credit is due, as Melodifestivalen does rake in thousands of dollars for charity every year. At the same time the show is mired with flat comedy, self referential and erogatory comedy and an overall sense of, Don’t bully us, we are just the silly show Melodifestivalen.

This contrast is what, in my opinion, makes Melodifestivalen uniquely frustrating to watch, and I have to admit, I do still watch it every year.

Tag: Eurovision song contest

Propaganda and subtle bias

Essey: mellodifestivalen, a tale of big egos and low expectations