Subscribe by RSS
Follow us on Twitter
Subscribe by Email
It doesn’t matter if you are in Europe or not, the global appeal of the Eurovision song contest is apparent and spreading further thanks to social media. Pop songs with a hidden political message, the tactical voting of neighbouring, and the dread of being an act that performs and fails to register a score. All of this makes for an exciting televisual and social media viewing spectacle.
An estimated 125 million people watched the event on television, this year hosted in Dusseldorf, Germany. Of that 125 million, an online and devoted many (Me included!) chose to add their own commentary to the kitsch proceedings via Twitter, Facebook and other online forums.
Using Alterian SM2, we tracked all online references, taking in 20+ languages, of every act across the timeline of the programme to see which stage of the broadcast saw online conversations take place around the participating 25 nations.
The Eurovision song contest is a tricky competition to predict ahead of time, since you just can’t foresee what the judges will go for, as their view accounts for 50% of the outcome. Of course, you can expect certain countries delivering the coveted 12 points to their next door neighbour, but you always have to watch out for entries that are one viewers’ “Douze points” being “Nil Points” to someone else. It is all part of the rich tapestry of European culture.
For days before the Eurovision Song Contest Final, Ireland’s representatives, Jedward, were getting the most buzz according to Google’s Eurovision search. With all this volume, why didn’t they win? And would the PR charm offensive of a European tour by Blue bolster their standing in countries where viewers could vote for them?
Clearly, volume of buzz isn’t everything – it’s vital to know what topics are driving the volume. Conversations like “I love Jedward’s song” may drive votes, but other messages like “Jedward are worse than the plague” will not. With Alterian SM2’s sentiment analysis competencies and a team of social media analysts, this would have been clear to Jedward before the Final. Sentiment for the day saw Jedward achieve 27 per cent in positive mentions and only 14 per cent were negative.
Peter Hoffer, of our Intrepid Insights division of Alterian offers up his thoughts on the implications of the data:
“Volume alone is not enough to predict a Eurovision winner. With 50% of the vote coming from professional juries, it’s vital to identify the ‘experts’ online and map their opinions. With the social data, we can do just that. By using the ‘Influencers’ identification capabilities of the tool, we can track the opinions of people with the highest levels of sway. With further engagement of these key targets, brands (or musicians for next year’s Eurovision contest) can more efficiently get their messages across and steer public opinion.”
The infographic above tells a great story of how we can map data across a tangible fixed constant – in this instance, the start through to the finish of the broadcast represented by time.
- We can see how the anticipatory tweets were significantly higher for Blue before they performed
- The eventual winner from Azerbaijan saw 50% of their social data during the transmission come in the final stage as scores came in
- 50% of Ireland’s online noise came during transmission, a likely result of the online audience being captivated by their performance itself
- 25th placed Switzerland were consistently average throughout and failed to stir the audience into any groundswell of support
So, neighbouring countries are happy and able to keep their surrounding friends on the Chirstmas card list; Blue and Jedward can hold their heads high knowing they weren’t rubbish, and Azerbaijan will be gearing up to host the party on their own turf next year. Meanwhile, we will keep pouring over the social media data to extrapolate tangible results that highlight the impact of social data on singing competitions, critical business issues and a range of marketing activities.
