Eurovision Song Contest: Can juries assess the quality of songs objectively?

This paper analyses the role of jury votes in the Eurovision Song Contest (ESC). We analysed the results of the six ESCs (from 2017 to 2023) in terms of the differences (1) between public and jury votes, (2) among jury votes, and (3) among public votes at the national and ESC levels. We applied 15,251 Spearman rank correlations. The role (mission) of the jury return in the competition, as explained by the organiser, is to ensure objectivity since it was concluded that the public is not entirely capable of objectively evaluating songs. Considering the mission of the jury return and the assumption that juries can fulfil it, we expected that the correlations between each national jury and ESC jury and among national juries would be high. Furthermore, it was expected that the correlations between each national public and ESC public and among the national public would be low or at least lower than those in the jury cases. However, the results are different and are the opposite of expectations. Additionally, the influence of juries on the results is equal to that of the public (without the rest of the world). Consequently, with the current voting system, the jury mission is only partly achieved, and the inclusion of juries highly influences the winner such that the winner is different from what the public thinks it should be. The situation becomes even more severe when the public has to accept a winner that was their only fifth choice (as in ESC 2024). The final conclusion is that the (jury) voting system still needs to be upgraded in the future, and our research proposals include establishing two awards, a jury award and a public award, among others.