Is Eurovision rigged? The hidden math behind the semi-finals

Eurovision success isn’t just about the music. Behind the glitter lies a web of numbers, alliances, and online buzz that decides who qualifies.

Back in 2021, after Eurovision was reinstated, following the cancellation during the pandemic, Albania and Moldova celebrated reaching the final, despite not being fan favourites.

Many experts were surprised at this qualification, especially given factors like geopolitical favoritism and a reputational pecking order.

This could well have been down to a splintering of the status quo, as the pent-up expectations due to the 2020 cancellation meant fans created their own voting economy on TikTok, Twitter, and other socials.

While Eurovision may have glitter and glam, the aura of unpredictability is ultimately a facade in the semi-finals, as there’s a hidden world of numbers lurking below the madness.

How voting works

Since 2023, Eurovision semi-finals have been decided solely by public televote, making them easier to analyse than the final, where jury input adds another layer of geopolitical unpredictability.

Each semi-final typically includes between 15-17 countries, and typically 10 countries advance from each heat.

The “Big Five” (UK, France, Germany, Spain, Italy) and the host country automatically qualify for the final, but each votes in one of the two semis.

Some fans think that there may be a running order bias, chosen by producers, with uptempo songs resulting favourably after being scheduled after a ballad or two.

Later slots in the show usually perform better, due to the recency effect, and a strong stage presence with elaborate choreography is usually remembered.

However, the main theory at large is that geography has helped influence the semi-final votes many times in the past.

Patterns in play

When the tidal wave of Eurovision washes over us, the conversation often gets caught up in the aesthetic of the songs themselves.

This year, notable mentions include the bookmakers' favourite Sweden laying on thick the sauna stereotypes with KAJ’s “Bara Bada Bastu.”

Also, Estonia, which upset the apple cart with eccentric Italian stereotypes with Tommy Cash singing “Espresso Macchiato”, should comfortably qualify for the final.

Malta is an interesting case in all of this, too. Its 2025’s entry, “Serving” by Miranda Conte, was previously called “Kant,” before the BBC pressured the team to change the title due to it sounding like an offensive word.

This shows that the Big Five countries have a grasp on the outcome, as you could claim that the cultural pedigree of a smaller nation has been stripped away in the name of censorship.

Since publication, this theory has been ramped up – as Eurovision faces a huge backlash following their surprise victory at the final.

Despite being the second favorites with the bookies, controversy is raging about the jury allegedly distorting the voting process.

Despite Israel – runners up – Ukraine and Estonia dominating public sentiment in the televote, the staid jury section seems to undermine public buzz in the 2025 edition.

Qualification form over the last two decades

Malta is also a country that’s not part of a geopolitical bloc and has a patchy qualification record compared to other nations that have local support.

Its qualification rate in the last two decades currently stands at 44.4%, which is mediocre at best.

Ukraine, in contrast, has a 100% qualification record from the semi-finals since 2004, attempting 14 times to get to the final and having a flawless path so far.

Throw into the mix countries like Sweden – though having Eurovision prestige with the joint number of wins – and Serbia, which also have nearby support, and you can witness high return rates at 92.9% and 80% respectively.

Interestingly, countries like Belgium and Switzerland, caught in the European go-between geopolitically – largely neutral – have poor conversion rates at 42.1% apiece.

Despite being part of the EU, Ireland – joint highest number of wins – also has a low success rate (38.9%), being geographically adrift from the continent.

Support in unison

The theory holds that the Nordic bloc of Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland, and Iceland commonly support each other.

The same can be said of the Balkan affinity of Serbia, Croatia, North Macedonia, and Slovenia.

And then for the Baltic states of Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia, among others, who often exchange votes. According to Paul Jordan, an expert on the competition, bloc voting isn't the whole story:

“I think in a close semi-final it can make a difference. Sometimes you just need a handful of points to qualify and if you have a few 8, 10, and 12 points from some countries, then that can be enough to make the difference.”

There can also be a freakonomics approach to looking at this voting process then, as the clinching factor can be very subtle, such a potential diaspora factor.

For example, Romania and Moldova often exchange points, plus Poland often receives strong televote points from the UK and Ireland.

But despite this, Jordan urges caution in pinning everything down to emigration factors:

“Its role is often exaggerated – sometimes you can see patterns – like Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands voting for Turkey (when they participated), but in general it’s the music which counts in my view,” Jordan observed.

Calculating social buzz

When looking at various factors in what determines Eurovision success, it’s important to remember that geopolitics and social media traction don’t cancel each other out.

To dismiss geography and fully attribute the success to social media would be discrediting the idea that Eurovision glory is a sum of complicated parts.

YouTube views, Spotify streams, and TikTok traction are measurable, but connecting them directly to geographical voting patterns is far murkier – even if fan forums and subreddits obsessively try.

One example of an outlier song was the Icelandic entry from 2020, “Think About Things” by Daði og Gagnamagnið, which went viral on social media long before the event was cancelled.

The quirky nature of the song undoubtedly helped propel it along, as well as the loyal fan base that Iceland has in Scandinavia.

This unforgettable entry broke from pop convention, and while a mix of factors might have carried it to victory, the cancelled final means we’ll never know.

The intersection of factors

Social media buzz and “the talk of the town” might be more of a pressing factor when the semi-finals are cleared.

Malta is poised in semi-final #2. Positioned by the bookies – also a prime source of public sentiment – as fourth favourite to win its heat, and tenth to win the final.

Cybernews will be keeping a watchful eye to see if it qualifies comfortably, particularly as it is up against countries with strong local support like Lithuania, Denmark, and Serbia.

Part of the fun in the process of watching a Eurovision heat isn’t only rejoicing and cringing in equal measure, but pitting my theory against yours.

And while the theory that “it all boils down to geography” is a little farfetched, there are definitely a lot of points to consider.