Eurovision farce. Or is it?

First a confession. I didn't watch the Eurovision song contest. Still, I heard the result - a win for Serbia-Herzogovina, with Britain in a lamentable second-from-last place. Having heard the UK entry I'm not sure a higher position would have been warranted. Cue lots of accusations that the vote is a farce and motivated just by politics.One lesson to be learned is that it seems that European-wide tastes in music differ wildly from the Anglo-American musical culture that we have been infused with all our lives. Britain is probably second only to the US in the extent to which our musical offerings have influenced youth culture around the world. So much so that UK Eurovision entries rarely, if ever, reflect the vibrance of our music scene. For some countries - like Finland - Eurovision means much more, as it is their chance to showcase their culture on a worldwide platform. They try harder, because it's important for their image abroad. That's just the way it is. The UK, France, Germany and Spain pay the most for the event and already have large music industries, so have little incentive to produce quality songs.

I've also heard the theory that countries tend to stick together in 'blocks' - ie Scandinavians voting for each other, Slavic countries sticking together and the countries of the former Soviet Union swapping votes. But to blame politcs sounds like a classic case of confusing cause with correlation. There is significant historical enmity between, for example, Ukraine and Russia, but that didn't stop them voting for each other. Besides, if your cultures are similar, isn't it natural that you should vote for muscial offerings that reflect your own? In fact, I believe that many countries voted for eastern and Scandinavian countries. Apparently their songs were better. Could it be that regional tastes in music rather than nationalism affect votes? I would say so.