Eurovision 2011 post-mortem

I noticed the other day that the split jury/televote results of this year's Eurovision Song Contest had appeared, meaning it's time to dig into them to see what (if anything) we can find. For the uninformed, the contest has, in an attempt to curb 'political' voting, used a 50% jury, 50% public vote system since 2009. In theory, the jury will be nice and objective, reining in any political tendencies amongst the hoi polloi. What's interesting, then, is to compare how the entrants fared with the jury and the public. Here are some of the highlights:

• Biggest winner under the televote this year was Russia, who finished a whopping 18 places higher with the public than with the jury (where they came rock bottom).
• Also faring well with the public, perhaps surprisingly, was the UK, finishing 17 places higher. Whilst we may try and take an "everybody hates us, we don't care" attitude to Eurovision, it seems that if we send a 'famous' boy band we can at least win over the public. Now if only they'd had a good song...
• At the other end, Austria, Slovenia and Denmark were the biggest losers amongst the public. They finished 19, 18 and 15 places lower on the televote than jury vote respectively.
  
• This is the first year when the public and the jury have disagreed over who should win. The public went for eventual winners Azerbaijan, whereas the jury preferred Italy (whose 11th place in the televote meant they could only manage second overall).
  

Finally, as with last year's results, I've produced a map summarising the differences between jury and televote. I haven't bothered including the semis this time round, and whilst there seems to be a bit of an Eastern bias, it's not overly convincing. (Click for big.)