⤷ to be honest, i don't see how people consider this a strong year (and i believe this assessment is shaped by the political state of the contest.) there’s many entries i would consider competent but adhere too closely to established musical tropes to be strong, while more experimental ones often felt messy on first listen.

• (i did not engage live & adhere to a financial boycott, this is for the sake of closure and not an endorsement of anything)

tier 1: masterpieces to be immortalised. for the acts i have an emotional investment in, which resonated with me most. (4.5/5 and above)

• 1. croatia
• 2. ukraine

tier 2: competent entries with a strong package, and nothing that i would change. (4/5 - 4.25/5)

• 3. denmark
• 4. finland
• 5. switzerland

tier 3: i generally enjoyed and would advocate for these entries, with some critique. (3.5 - 3.75/5)

• 6. romania
• 7. albania
• 8. portugal
• 9. czechia
• 10. latvia
• 11. lithuania

tier 4: i’m not the target audience, but i appreciate these entries.

• 12. serbia
• 13. moldova
• 14. montenegro
• 15. italy
• 16. uk

i feel ambivalent towards these entries, positive and negative critique cancel each other out.

• 17. sweden
• 18. malta
• 19. austria
• 20. poland
• 21. estonia
• 22. greece
• 23. luxembourg
• 24. france

these entries actively frustrate me, i would not engage with them outside the context of the contest.

• 25. australia
• 26. bulgaria
• 27. belgium
• 28. cyprus
• 29. georgia
• 30. norway
• 31. germany
• 32. armenia

there is an elephant in the room; i am unwilling to discuss this entry

• ✘: san marino, azerbaijan, israel