EBU responds on specific jury voting
After the 2014 Eurovision Song Contest ended, there were many speculations on the jury votes from Azerbaijan, Belarus, Montenegro and Armenia, the jury votes of which created many speculations and lots of conspiracy theories.
EBU’s response on the issue to WiWibloggs.com was:
To invalidate a vote, either jury or televoting, is a very serious measure with a lot of implications, which we don’t take lightly. In the case of Georgia, there was a clear and immediate reason to invalidate votes, based on the recommendation of PwC and our voting partner Digame. In case of the other countries you mentioned – Azerbaijan, Belarus and Montenegro – the jury votes are more spread. It is clear that there is strong unity in their rankings, we saw that as well, but they were not indisputably invalid. That’s why PwC, Digame and the EBU decided to consider the result valid.
Regarding your analysis of the Armenian vote, these results leave a lot of room for speculation, but it is not a result that is indisputably invalid either. I would suggest you ask AMPTV and the jury members to give an explanation. There are a lot of pros and cons for any voting system, whether it is 50/50, full televoting, full jury, a different mix, a different setup, etc. The perfect system does not exist. But every year, we can do more to make it more perfect.