Voting at Song for Europe

Let me first congratulate Chiara for her touching song Angel, and also all the other singers for their performance on stage at the Song for Europe finals.

Unlike last year, this year's voting system was based entirely on the public's preferences for the enlisted 22 songs. As I see it, this is neither fair nor ethical. Being such a small population, the singers most probably had many relatives and friends who voted for their song simply for support and not because it was the best song.

Some singers might have had more friends than others, thus giving them a type of 'competitive advantage'. In other words some people voted with their heart and not with their 'ears'.

Mind you, I agree that Angel was one of the best songs presented yesterday week.

However, I disagree with this year's system for the simple reason that not everybody is able to judge good music (I may not be a good judge either, do you get the point of the whole argument? I should therefore not be part of the 100 per cent voting authority).

In my opinion, having a panel of foreign judges with half the voting power, and the public with the other half, is the best system. If a song obtains the highest number of votes from both sectors, then it probably really deserves to represent Malta at the Eurovision Festival.

Fortunately this year's winner deserved to win, but this may not be so in future.