Words: Scarlet Morrison (she/her)
‘Eurovision is non-political, strictly neutral. Doesn’t matter if you’re good or brutal…‘
In the semi-final of the Eurovision Song Contest 2025 hosted in Basil, Switzerland, Hazel Brugger’s lyrics, meant to mock Swiss culture, in fact raised eerie feelings of irony. While to the naked eye it might seem like a camp celebration of pop songs and dubstep, in reality, the song contest bolsters both European morale and encourages the status quo in a world increasingly reliant on political ignorance, guilt, and idleness. Undoubtedly, Israel’s consistent participation in this competition, while perpetuating a genocide in Palestine, highlights how Eurovision is not and has never been neutral.
Throughout its history, Eurovision has been a cultural artefact that celebrates European identity through sexuality, gender, creativity, and artistry. Its structure typically follows a week-long series of events in mid-May: two semi-finals and a grand final, where 37 countries compete for the coveted title of Eurovision champion.
The prize? A glass microphone trophy, the right to host the next competition, and a significant boost in global recognition, with many songs topping international charts for weeks. Waterloo, for example, performed by ABBA as Sweden’s 1974 entry, catapulted the band into global superstardom and changed the landscape of pop music forever.
Countries vary in how seriously they treat their selection process, with some hosting months-long national competitions, like Sweden’s Melodifestivalen, to find their representative. Then there’s the ‘Big Five’ — the UK, France, Germany, Spain, and Italy — who are automatically granted places in the final due to their disproportionate financial contributions to the European Broadcasting Union (EBU). Even in a song contest, capital rules.
So yes, it’s fair to argue that Eurovision has had a positive impact, embracing friendly rivalry between nations and a space where queerness, gender fluidity, and cultural experimentation thrive. But it has also always been inherently political. From Greece and Cyprus consistently voting for each other in jury rounds, to Ukraine’s controversial 2022 win amidst the Russian invasion (despite the UK winning the jury and public vote elsewhere), and the adoption of the slogan ‘United by Music’- Eurovision has never. been. neutral. The participation of Israel especially, has also brought things to a new and troubling advancement of blatant media manipulation.
While Israel’s participation has always raised contentious debate, in 2024 this has severely escalated. The world, now more exposed than ever to the trauma endured by Palestinians, has started seeing Eurovision for what it often is: a machine for political messaging.
The Israeli contestant, Eden Golan, faced widespread backlash from fellow countries. Artists from Greece, Ireland, and the Netherlands criticised her participation, citing the contradiction of celebrating unity while a genocide unfolded. During live performances, boos erupted — so much so that the EBU muted audience audio, avoided crowd shots, and clumsily dodged questions in press conferences.
The Dutch contestant, Joost Klein, was openly critical of Israel’s involvement. In a shocking and controversial move, he was disqualified just before the final due to assault allegations. However, a few days after the final had aired, authorities later dropped the case, citing insufficient evidence of serious intent. Many fans and media critics alike now argue that his disqualification was the result of a slander campaign to silence criticism against Israel’s participation. The UK’s own entrant, Olly Alexander, who had been urged by LGBTQ+ organisations to boycott the contest, refused to step down. The result? The UK came 18th, with zero public votes.
In 2025, Israel placed second. It felt like a collective moment of paralysis — the anticipation of Austria’s win was not just about music, but about morality. Across Europe many also boycotted the show entirely, sentiments justifiably fueled by axing the show altogether. This was especially successful at reducing ticket sales and advertising the event. However, the significant absence was also definitely missed in the voting process, as without these votes, Israel tipped the balance with over 290 televotes and 12 points from the UK.
Now, it’s just a singing competition, right?
Wrong.
Eurovision winners shape political culture. They become symbols. Think Nemo in 2024, a non-binary singer from Switzerland or Conchita Wurst in 2014, Austria’s bearded drag queen, whose win became a landmark moment for queer visibility in Europe.
And as with any dystopian narrative or moment of political unrest, what makes mass violence digestible is distraction — state messaging dressed up as performance.
In 2024, the Eurovision voting campaigns in Israel promoted Eden Golan not as a contestant, but as a symbol of Israeli strength. Posters filled cities. Israeli embassies globally pushed her image. Her song, Hurricane, was rewritten to sound less political after its original title “October Rain” was deemed too reflective of October 7th — the day Hamas launched its attack on Israeli civilians.
In 2025, Israel’s entrant, Yuval Rapheal, was a survivor of the October 7th attacks. Though instructed not to discuss it in press appearances, it was clear Eurovision has continued this rhetoric. In performances leading up to the event, the fake applause continued. In the rehearsals, other contestants entered with whistles and large Palestinian flags which were removed from the venue. Spanish commentators like RTVE were threatened with fines from the EBU from merely mentioning Palestinian victims in the semi-final. While Yuval was promoted without interuption, despite evidence of dissent such as Palestinian flags, booing and pro-Palestinian commentary, the EBU enforced political neutrality selectively, restricting pro- Palestinian voices amid public outrage.
When the EBU chooses to ban Russia following its invasion of Ukraine, yet platform Israel — which is not even in Europe —, whilst it perpetrates what many nations, international organisations and communities, have labelled a genocide, the neutrality is a myth. The EBU are choosing a side and placing independent contestant’s in the firing range.
And for those who argue this is a war, not a genocide — that Israel is simply defending itself against Hamas — ask yourself: how can it be a war when only one side has statehood, tanks, media coverage, and global funding?
When the EBU presents slogans like ‘Eurovision is politically neutral, it doesn’t matter if you are good or brutal’— it’s not just tone-deaf. It’s dangerous. If Israel wins Eurovision in the coming years — if a state accused of war crimes and genocide hosts a festival themed ‘United by Music’ — it won’t just be ironic. It will be deeply troubling. Because state messaging isn’t obvious. Sometimes, it’s a recognisable pop ballad with a fake standing ovation and muted protests. And the world applauds anyway.
