Jury rules tightened for 2014 Eurovision Song Contest

Jury rules tightened for 2014 Eurovision Song Contest
Geneva, Switzerland -

Earlier today, EBU/EUROVISION released the rules for the 2014 Eurovision Song Contest. Although the fundamentals have not changed, organisers are tightening the rules and increasing openness on the jury voting, which makes up 50% of the outcome in each participating country.

Under the new rules, the names of all jury members will be announced on the 1st of May, before the contest. Additionally, EBU/EUROVISION will publish the ranking submitted by each individual jury member for all shows right after the Final, and thus the split results of jury voting and televoting for each country. To increase diversity, music industry professionals can only take a seat in a national jury if they have not been in the jury during one of the previous two editions of the contest.


"Tighter rules and increased openness are important for the Eurovision Song Contest to build on its success," Jon Ola Sand, the Executive Supervisor of the contest on behalf of EBU/EUROVISION, adding: "to make sure participants, viewers and fans know that we have done and will always do our utmost to secure a fair result. These changes show that the Eurovision Song Contest is an ever evolving tradition, which continues to adapt to the spirit of time."

"Through this increased openness, we want to assure everyone - participants, press and fans - can come to understanding of how we obtain a valid result. With these changes, we hope to put an end to the kind of speculation we have recently seen," said Dr. Frank-Dieter Freiling, Chairman of the Reference Group.

Over the past months, EBU/EUROVISION has been investigating reports about alleged attempts to unfairly influence the voting. Sand: "If our investigation brings about evidence of wrongdoing, we will take the required action."

EBU/EUROVISION will open a section on the contest's official website where jury members and viewers at home can report voting irregularities, so they can be adequately investigated by the organisers, the contest's voting partner Digame and PwC, which is overseeing the voting procedure.

The contest's governing body on behalf of the participating broadcasters, the Reference Group, as well as the EBU's TV Committee unanimously approved the rules.

Earlier this year, Emmelie de Forrest won the 2013 contest with Only Teardrops, securing Denmark's right to host the next edition of the contest for public broadcaster DR. The contest will be held on the 6th, 8th and 10th of May, 2014 at the B&W Hallerne in Copenhagen under the slogan 'Join Us!' The list of represented countries will be issued in early January.

There are 41 comments

Your comment is very welcome! Those not in line with the Terms of Use of this website will be removed by a moderator, and could lead to blocking your MyEurovision account. Reactions are only allowed in English and French.

Note that it can take a couple of minutes for your comment to appear here, it will appear immediately on your MyEurovision profile page
  • Posted on 12 May 2014 at 19:54
    Having closely examined the results I would suggest that the EBU seriously consider disqualifying Armenia from future competitions. Their jury results are nothing short of a disgrace. It would appear that there was widespread collusion among this jury to intentionally mark down the songs which were perceived to be the main competition to Armenia song, thereby trying to give Armenia an unfair advantage by awarding points to songs that they perceived as no threat. I think that the EBU needs to investigate this and take the appropriate action against Armenia report to the moderator
  • Posted on 24 February 2014 at 23:31
    Great, now release the telephone/jury split votes from 2013. report to the moderator
  • Posted on 20 November 2013 at 05:59
    It would be great if they would opt to bring back the orchestra sure. If you think the same please write in this petition: http://www.esclivemusic.com/
    Make your voice heard, the more write in, the more chances there are for the EBU to finally bring back the orchestra and make it optional for each contestant (at least) report to the moderator
  • Posted on 16 October 2013 at 21:10
    Did you knew that in my book of english lesson(The name of the book is "Revised Choices",there is a chapter that is devoted to the Eurovision Song Contest????
    Its really A-M-A-Z-I-N-G!!!I'm a reallyy big fan and that chapter is - of course it is- my favorite!!!! report to the moderator
  • Posted on 24 September 2013 at 20:23
    How about only to let the 26 finalists countries vote in the Final and let us hear the full voting from
    1 to 12 points. Before i made my own voting form and wrote all the points down, now it's impossible to do.
    At least live as it happens. Say NO To all Competitors to Vote in the Final.

    Greetings from Norway : ) report to the moderator
  • Posted on 23 September 2013 at 07:18
    I'm not sure about the results of the voting, who control this ??? It's like politics, pfff

    I'm just watching the show and for the rest... report to the moderator
  • Posted on 22 September 2013 at 15:29
    @ MrEurovision

    Lol, just lol. I'm speechless. When the purpose of a system is to eliminate a certain geopolitical group of countries completely then this is bloc voting at its worst in its own right. I think that Croatia and Montenegro, which by the way had never qualified before, deserved to be in the final musicwise. Slovenia and Serbia, on the other hand, were bad indeed and didn't make it by televotes either.

    If the the EBU is so crazy after promoting modern western values through the Eurovision Song Contest it is ridiculous to use a voting system based on ancient ideas of the Middle Ages and earlier, diving the electorate into 'plebs' and 'elite'. report to the moderator
  • Posted on 22 September 2013 at 13:31
    Waw stop with your whining about the Big 5. They are there end of and the removal of 1 could have massive repurcussions on the contest. As for other countries paying more to get this status is also silly- if every country did that then we'd never need the semi finals.

    Why is there a problem with Jury voting? You're using them as an exscuse why some countries did rubbish last year like Ireland- granted if a country did badly based on public votes you'd all be crying for jury voting again?

    Get a grip. report to the moderator
  • Posted on 22 September 2013 at 08:31
    We're over-analysing some of these voting responses. The whole point of juries was to end the bloc voting and allow for a greater diversity of songs. That has fundamentally achieved. Not one single Balkan nation made the final - unheard of in telovte-only years. In fact, it was the opposite. That Ireland finished last when it might have finished second last under a minor aggregation change is irrelevant to the top of the table. Maybe one in 50 years someone else might win over another, so? It's all still opinion and does validate a system as "right", it just means it provided a different result. The only change that could shake up the table is increasing points blocks to 15. There's so many countries now that more should be rewarded. I'd go 1,1,1,2,2,2,3,3,4,5,6,7,8,10,12 - to preserve "douze points" tradition. report to the moderator
  • Posted on 21 September 2013 at 22:03
    I don't want to be part of something where rules are needed to prevent corruption and cheating. It's only a song contest, countries should be trustworthy and play fair without the need for new rules to 'clamp down' on dubious voting. The UK could come last every year, I'm not just a bitter Brit that's not the point. I would simply like the final results to reflect the quality of the song/performance instead of reflecting political and cultural allegiances. report to the moderator
  • Posted on 21 September 2013 at 19:38
    Does this mean the UK has a chance of winning? report to the moderator
  • Posted on 21 September 2013 at 15:08
    In my opinion Turkey have sent nothing special in the past 9 year's I've been watching it and quite frankly if they're gonna be stubborn and complain about unfairness when they achieve ludicrous results year after year due to diaspora and 'brotherhoods' then be my guest... I have nothing against the Turkish people whatsoever but TRT really needs to open its eyes and see how lucky it's doing. report to the moderator
  • Posted on 21 September 2013 at 14:53

    @ Maxime01

    I'd also like to hear an explanation how the EBU/digame finds out whether votes come in through commissioned power voting or casual viewers that support their favourite up to twenty times. Not that I agree with this high threshold, but as long as twenty calls/SMS are officially allowed and the voter pays for that there is absolutely exculpation to remove them from the count.
    Your conclusion is right, personally I haven't participated in the voting since 2009, the last time all detailed results were published. report to the moderator
  • Posted on 21 September 2013 at 14:53
    @ EuRo Fan

    Exactly. What changes has the implementation of the 'jury' vote brought about in the end other than killing musical diversity (in particular ethnic songs), destroying two super exciting nip-and-tuck races in 2011 and 2012, and cushioning slightly the fall of fanwanks now and then?

    @ Usaga

    The bloc voting in 2007 was as strong as in any other year televoting was in use, or at least since Eurovision's great enlargement in 2004. Do you think millions of televoters make a secret deal to allow western entries winning the contest one year and boycotting them all the other? From an average viewer's perspective apparently none of the western entries happened to be worthy of a good position that year, and as we know from the belatedly revealed 50/50 results, merely Germany would of benefitted from a jury as well.

    to be continued... report to the moderator
  • Posted on 21 September 2013 at 14:43
    @Pretellier Yes it's fair. Because the Big 5 are the countries who give that money for that big contest! ;) report to the moderator