The Eurovision Reference Group has announced today that the split votes for the 2014 Eurovision Song Contest will be revealed after next year’s Final.
The full result of the televote, the combined jury ranking, and the individual rankings from each jury member, will be “announced on the official website of the ESC, www.eurovision.tv , after the end of the Final.”
Not only will this provide a way for individuals to see the workings of the new ranking/combination system, it will offer one of the most detailed looks at the jury system in the history of the Eurovision Song Contest, and it will be done in public. It’s important that the EBU will be “doing their utmost to secure a fair result” as Executive Supervisor Jon Ola Sand points out, but it’s just as important that the public can see them do this work in public. Transparency requires public oversight, and the discussions around the voting will benefit from this open approach to the voting behind “Europe’s Favourite TV Show”.
Here at ESC Insight we’ve talked for many years on the need to have the complete jury vote available for inspection (here, here, and here, for example), so we’d like to say thank you to the Reference Group and the EBU for this rule change.
Shall we throw a party?
D’You Know What I Mean
That’s not all, mind you, as there is another tweak to the jury rules. While the selection of jury members are still in the remit of the national broadcasters, the EBU has asked that jurors not have been part of a jury in the preceding two years, must follow a profession in the industry (radio DJ, artist, composer, lyricist, or music producer), and each jury should be balanced in terms of gender, age and background.
To increase the transparency, the names of each jury member will be announced on May 1st 2014, in advance of the semi-finals and grand final.
While this may leave open the idea of individuals being influenced by ‘mysterious third parties’, the fact that their individual ranking will be published will give any nefarious group pause for thought.
A transparent box from Azerbaijan.
Definitely, Maybe
Stepping back from the immediate positive reaction, there are still going to be questions asked of the EBU around this issue. The voting around Eurovision 2013 – the first year of the ‘all up’ ranking method – has been contentious, In part because the new system meant that the old rules of thumb people used to understand the combination of the public and jury votes no longer applied, but also because of the partial information, claims, and hyperbole around the voting after the Contest in May.
These have damaged ‘Brand Eurovision’ in the eyes of the mainstream media across the world. Here in the UK it’s unusual to have Eurovision appear as a water cooler moment outside of May, but the alleged purchase of votes has continues to be discussed as late as last week on BBC News and in the tabloid press.
Imagine how differently the stories could have been told over the summer had the EBU been as open and forthcoming with the 2013 results as they are going to be with the 2014 results.
Don’t Look Back In Anger
People will draw their own conclusions around the refusal to release the split votes from the 2013 Song Contest.
Tin foil at the ready!
Speaking to the official website, Executive Supervisor Jon Ola Sand said the 2013 splits would not be released. “No, the rule changes is for the 2014 Eurovision Song Contest. According to the rules for the previous years, this is not an option.”
Which is a courageous decision. After all, the rules of the 1956 Song Contest probably don’t cover the release of the voting information, but if they were to turn up, I’m sure that Sand and the EBU would find a way to release them.
Roll With It
It feels like the issue of the Jury has been put to rest, and I suspect to the quiet delight of many who follow the Eurovision Song Contest. The Reference Group and the EBU have taken on the feedback from the summer, decided on a course of action, cleanly implemented it, and clearly communicated it with the release of 2014 Rules (PDF link).
Hopefully we’ll see more of this over the next year. There are still a number of issues facing the Song Contest that need to be addressed, from the financing required by the host broadcaster and the budget requirements for individual delegations, to staying relevant in the ever-changing media landscape and and ensuring a significant number of EBU members continue to enter the Contest. And the investigation into the vote-rigging allegations is still ongoing.
But a man’s job has been done today. So have a cup of tea, and let’s work on everything else tomorrow.
Does this mean that anyone in San Marino who has ever taken piano lessons will, sooner or later, get to be on a Eurovision jury?
I really didn’t expect they would ever go as far as releasing individual juror rankings, however obvious its benefits. They appear to have gone all out and ticked every box on the jury side.
I do think there is a principle at stake regarding 2013 about sticking to the terms agreed and expected by competitors and not releasing additional info, or using revelations by some to bully others.
After a decade or so, fine, but not while people are still invested in it.
For now, 2013 is an experiment in progress that might have more to say, and I’m not sure that a public autopsy at this stage would be a brand-enhancing exercise.
This is a good first step. Now, the EBU should adress televoting issues, such as implementing the one vote per telephone number rule. Or would that kill the golden goose?
About the televoting:
Instead of 1 vote per phone, limit the amount of times you can vote for a song from one phone.
Let say you limit the amount of times you can vote for a song from the same phone to 5 times(and any number up to 5 times is fine by me). After 5 times the song number is blocked, or when you try for the 6th time you get a message saying that only the first 5 times are counted for the voting.
You can still vote 10 or 20 times from the same phone(not sure what the rule is), but you can vote for the same song to a maximal of 5 times.
That will make the practice of influencing the televote quite an expensive adventure.
Shevek, the phone line income is an important one for some broadcasters, and I don’t see this changing for 2014. If you assume 10% of the audience vote, that’s the best part of 7 million people voting on a Saturday night. So 20 votes by 70 million people or 1 vote by 70 million people still gives the same ‘margin’ of victory percentage wise.
That may very well be. However, it would make things more difficult for whomever tries to buy votes. RTP (they are not swimming in money) accepted only tha last vote per phone number, when FdC was still around.
P.S. – welcome back!
Nice to see televoting reclaim the limelight, since it is at least a real dilemma and other issues shouldn’t be so problematic.
I would be inclined to explore the possibility of raising the cost on successive votes from the same account, without hard limits or any dependence on how the votes are used.