Malta should not continue to participate in the Eurovision Song Contest, according to almost two-thirds of respondents who took part in an online poll held on The Malta Independent website.
Some of the respondents who posted comments on the website described the contest as a “farce”, “a big joke”, “a stupid contest” and a “waste of money”.
After Malta’s failure to make it to this year’s final in Helsinki, only 33.5 per cent of respondents said that Malta should continue participating.
One respondent said that Malta had done very well in the contest in the recent past and that the Maltese must learn to be objective and lead others to become impartial.
“Why should we consider not taking part, before considering how we can improve? Most participants admit that they vote tactically; we might try to show that we can break away from this. That would be a legacy to be proud of, even if we decide not to continue participating in future.”
Another respondent wrote “we are to continue to take part in order to help keep Malta on the map”.
Others who posted comments on the website, however, said that Malta was spending too much money on what was described by some as a “farce”.
Interestingly, a UK resident who posted a comment said the eastern European voting will not allow any of the western participants to even get a look in, “so why don’t we leave it to them to get on with it? Maybe we can start our own (contest) and the winner from both sides can be entered for an all-Europe participation to find an outright winner”.
A Finnish resident who participated in the contest was very analytical about the situation. He wrote: “interestingly, most voted against, naturally because of Malta’s latest setback! However, having lived in Finland for over 30 years, and having witnessed Finland’s defeat year after year, before it won the contest last year, one realises that the importance of participating is more important than winning.
“Helsinki had a wonderful week during the recent festival. Naturally, Malta could review the song-writing policy, but on the other hand there is always a need for diversity, and voting is always a risky business, whatever the quality of the song”.
Some respondents said that yes, Malta should continue participating in the contest, but the festival should not be taken so seriously and only a minimum budget should be allocated.
Another respondent, who said he was a music teacher and composer, said that Malta should only continue participating if some of the regulations regarding the contest are changed.
He suggested that the voting system should reflect the opinion of an international panel of judges, possibly none from the competing countries, for the sake of fairness. He also proposed that the panel should hold 50 per cent of the vote, while another 50 per cent should be allocated to televoting.
He also said he was convinced that there was a lot of musical talent locally, so the method of selection for the best song should involve the input of all composers, authors, choreographers and any other parties who were involved. The Tourism and Culture Ministry would bring all the parties together and they would then be able to present the best package, he said.
Another respondent said that the Eurovision is increasingly politically and regionally-motivated. While some argued that the contest could be beneficial to Maltese participants, the respondent asked: “Where is Claudette Pace in the singing world today? Where is Fabrizio Faniello? Where are those many recent Maltese contenders for the big prize?”
Acknowledging that Ira Losco “is doing well, the Maltese way”, he referred to song-writers and composers who can offer their talents to foreign singers, before concluding that “Malta is spending far too much money on this farce, and it’s about time that all involved started taking a walk!”