The EBU Defends Eurovision Voting Amid Rising Chorus of Doubt
In a world where a singing competition can ignite more geopolitical tension than a G7 summit, the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) has released a detailed, borderline bureaucratic epistle reaffirming the integrity of the Eurovision Song Contest’s voting system. The 2025 edition crowned JJ of Austria as the undisputed winner — or so insists the EBU, in a statement as meticulously crafted as a Swiss voting machine.
Martin Green , Director of the Eurovision Song Contest, took to the metaphorical stage with a letter that ticks every box: congratulations, transparency, a gentle nod to diaspora voting habits, and enough technical jargon to make an IT audit blush. In the aftermath of increasing criticism and murmurs of irregularities following this year’s Grand Final, the EBU clearly felt it was time to clear the air — or at the very least, control the narrative.
“His performance and song rightly, clearly and validly won the Contest,” Green stated, firmly slamming shut the door to any speculative soap operas. JJ’s triumph, in the eyes of the EBU, is not up for debate.
To ensure credibility, the statement leans on what can only be described as a fortified voting fortress. The EBU’s partner, Once Germany GmbH, uses multiple redundant systems and platforms — because one backup just isn’t Eurovision enough. More than 60 people in Cologne, with reinforcements in Vienna and Amsterdam, monitor the vote count with what we presume are binoculars and spreadsheets. Every step is verified under what’s called the “8-eye principle” — a security term that sounds oddly like a Bond villain’s surveillance plan.
The entire process is then double-checked by independent compliance watchdog EY, formerly Ernst & Young. If a single vote even thinks about misbehaving, it appears at least eight people are ready to glare at it sternly.
But it’s not just about the technology. The EBU delicately acknowledges the influence of diaspora voting — the phenomenon where large, enthusiastic expat communities often turn televoting into a family reunion. Green reminds us this isn’t new, nor uniquely Eurovision: “personal attributes, back stories, geographic affiliations and current affairs” all colour the vote. In short: Eurovision is many things, but a sterile talent contest is not one of them.
One topic the EBU is planning to revisit is promotional campaigning. While promoting acts is currently allowed — and indeed expected — there’s concern that lavish campaigns may skew the “natural mobilisation” of audiences. Or to put it less diplomatically: some delegations may be outspending others to an uncomfortable degree.
Also up for review is the rule allowing 20 votes per payment method — intended to let viewers support multiple favourites. While the EBU maintains there’s no evidence this influences results unfairly, it concedes the question deserves a second look.
The final word? The Reference Group — the governing Eurovision body composed of member representatives — will examine this year’s data, as it does every June, to decide if any rule tweaks are warranted. No torches or pitchforks yet, just Excel and institutional memory.
Martin Green signs off by reasserting what the EBU clearly sees as gospel: JJ and Austria won fair and square.
Because in Eurovision, as in life, nothing says “everything’s fine” like a thousand-word explanation.
Source: eurovision.tv
