Eurovision 2024 was unlike any song contest before it – not because of the music, but because of the political storm surrounding Israel’s participation. As war raged in Gaza, a loud chorus of fans, activists, and even some broadcasters questioned why Israel was allowed to compete at Eurovision, when Russia had been expelled in 2022 for its war in Ukraine. Despite public pressure and calls from countries like Spain to reconsider Israel’s place, the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) held firm. This article takes a critical, fact-based look at why Israel was not expelled, examining evidence of political and economic influence, allegations of vote manipulation, reactions from Spain and other countries, and what frustrated Eurovision fans have been doing in response. It’s a story of music mixed with geopolitics – and a youth-driven movement insisting on accountability and peace.
Power and Influence: Why Israel Was “Untouchable”
From the outset, the EBU – which organizes Eurovision – made its stance clear: Israel would remain in Eurovision 2024. In December 2023, as the Gaza conflict intensified, the EBU acknowledged “concerns and deeply held views” about Israel, but emphasized that all member broadcasters are eligible to compete. In other words, since Israel’s public broadcaster KAN is an EBU member in good standing, it had a right to participate. The EBU even stated that KAN “complies with all competition rules” and thus could not be barred. This official line was that Eurovision is a cultural event “not a contest between governments,” as the EBU reiterate.
Many critics saw a double standard. After all, in February 2022 the EBU had swiftly banned Russia from Eurovision after its invasion of Ukraine, on the grounds that Russia’s presence would bring the contest into disrepute. Belgian ministers pointed out this contradiction: “Just like Russia has been excluded… following its invasion of Ukraine, Israel should be excluded until it puts an end to its flagrant violations of international law,” argued Belgium’s Flemish culture minister in early 2024. Yet in Israel’s case, the EBU resisted any similar action.
So, why the hesitation to act against Israel? One factor appears to be political and economic influence. Israel is not a lone pariah in Europe – it has powerful allies and a deep integration in Western cultural circuits. Unlike the near-unanimous condemnation of Russia, European governments were divided over how to handle Israel. No broad diplomatic sanctions regimen was imposed on Israel as it was on Russia, and thus broadcasters weren’t united in demanding Israel’s removal. In fact, some influential voices in entertainment pushed to keep politics out: an open letter by the pro-Israel group “Creative Community for Peace” gathered 400+ signatures from artists and executives urging Eurovision not to ban Israel. Signatories included industry figures like music executive Scooter Braun and actress Helen Mirren, reflecting how Israel’s supporters mobilized in cultural spheres as well.
There were also whispers about Eurovision’s sponsors. Notably, one of Eurovision’s prime sponsors since 2020 is Moroccanoil, a cosmetics brand that – despite its name – is based in Israel. Moroccanoil has invested millions of euros into the contest. This led some eurofans to cynically speculate that the EBU “would never kick Israel out ’cuz they only care about money”, suggesting fear of losing sponsorship cash. Such claims even made it into media headlines, with The Sun reporting Eurovision was “accused of refusing to boot Israel… because it could lose its prime sponsor”. The EBU officially denied this, stating that the list of participants has “no connection with, or impact on” sponsor partnerships. Nonetheless, the perception of financial motives lingered among skeptics.
Israel’s own investment in Eurovision cannot be overlooked either. The Israeli government has historically seen Eurovision as a PR opportunity. After Israel’s previous win in 2018, for example, officials openly spoke of leveraging the contest to improve Israel’s image, “cleaning up” its reputation on the world stage. Hosting Eurovision 2019 in Tel Aviv was viewed by Israel’s government as a chance to whitewash human rights criticisms. This context makes it plausible that Israel’s diplomatic clout was quietly exercised to keep its spot in 2024. Indeed, the Israeli Foreign Ministry was deeply involved in Eurovision 2024 (as we’ll see later), treating it as more than just a music show.
In short, Israel’s continued presence at Eurovision 2024 can be traced to a mix of official policy (EBU insisting on apolitical rules) and unofficial influence (alliances, sponsors, and lobbying). The EBU’s decision was backed by some and condemned by others, but it ultimately highlighted a tension: Eurovision preaches unity and non-politics, yet in practice it had made a political judgment call – one that happened to favor Israel.
Allegations of Vote Rigging and a “Manufactured” Televote
When the Eurovision 2024 Grand Final took place in Malmö, the results themselves poured gasoline on the fire. Israel’s entry – “Hurricane” performed by 20-year-old Eden Golan – finished 5th overall, a respectable placement. But the devil was in the details of the voting. The contest uses a split system: half the points come from professional juries (music industry jurors in each country) and half from the public televote. In Israel’s case, there was an unprecedented gap between the two: only 52 points from the juries, but a whopping 323 points from the public vote. To put this in perspective, juries ranked Israel a lowly 12th place (no jury gave Eden Golan the top 12-point score at all). Yet the public televote ranked Israel 2nd overall, just behind Croatia. Israel won the public vote in 15 different countries – more than any other contestant in 2024 – including major markets like the UK, France, and Germany. This kind of jury-public split had “never been so extreme”, as one long-time fan remarked, and it immediately raised eyebrows about how those televote points were obtained.
On social media and fan forums, accusations of vote manipulation began flying. Some fans suspected organized voting campaigns or even automated “bot” voting in favor of Israel. “Where the HELL did all that sudden support for Israel’s entry come from?” one user mused, noting that Israel’s televote haul defied all predictions. Another eurofan bluntly argued that “Israel’s televote result was achieved by outright cheating” and called for Israel’s disqualification. These remained allegations – the EBU did not report any technical fraud in the voting system – but the fan community’s suspicions were not baseless.
In the days after the final, evidence emerged confirming an organized effort behind Israel’s public vote surge. An Israeli news outlet revealed that the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs itself orchestrated a massive televote campaign for Eden Golan. Israeli officials admitted that they mobilized “friendly audiences” across Europe to vote the maximum 20 times each for Israel. Slick multi-language ads were pushed on platforms like YouTube, featuring Eden Golan urging viewers in English, French, German, Italian, and more to support her. One such ad even referenced “the wave of hatred and Muslim demonstrations in Malmö” and called on a “silent majority” to stand with Israel – a strikingly political message to mix with Eurovision voting. In essence, Israel ran a state-sponsored get-out-the-vote operation globally, treating Eurovision like a diplomatic campaign.
Is this illegal or against Eurovision rules? Not explicitly. Eurovision’s rules do bar certain forms of political messaging, but encouraging people to vote for your song is standard practice. Many countries promote their entries – though usually it’s the broadcasters or fan clubs doing it, not government ministries. What made this case unusual was its scale and official backing. It clearly “drew votes from many who don’t otherwise tune in to Eurovision” (as even the Times of Israel noted), essentially astroturfing the popular vote. Critics argue this undermines the spirit of fair competition, turning the televote into a battle of who can organize (or spend) more to rally votes, rather than a genuine reflection of audiences’ favorite song.
Meanwhile, the Israeli delegation had a very different complaint: they felt Israel was actually the victim of bias. In a statement to media, Israel’s broadcaster KAN accused other delegations of “an unprecedented display of hatred” toward their team during Eurovision 2024. They pointed out that not a single jury gave Israel top points, interpreting it as a political boycott by music professionals. (It’s true that some jury members likely had personal or political reservations; at least one Norwegian musician publicly said “there was one set of rules for Israel, another for the rest” regarding security and it made artists uncomfortable.) Israeli officials and supportive media spun the public vote result as a sign that “the people” supported Israel even if elites (juries) did not. One commentator celebrated that the televote showed a “silent majority” in Europe stands with Israel despite pro-Palestinian “noise”. Even Israel’s Prime Minister chimed in, boasting that Eden Golan had “already won” against a “horrible wave of antisemitism” after seeing the televote outcome.
The truth lies somewhere in between the narratives. Did Israel “rig” the televote? There’s no proof of illegal tampering, but yes, the vote was heavily swayed by a coordinated campaign rather than organic fandom – a fact openly acknowledged by Israeli officials. Were the juries biased against Israel? It’s very possible many jurors marked Israel down due to the political context, consciously or unconsciously. The contest became politicized on all sides, despite EBU’s claim of neutrality. What’s confirmed is that Eurovision 2024’s voting became a proxy battleground: pro-Israel and pro-Palestine sentiments spilling into what songs people supported. When Eden Golan got on stage, thousands in the live audience booed as an act of protest – a sound that Eurovision’s producers tried to drown out on the TV broadcast with artificial crowd noise. (Eurovision had experience with this “anti-booing technology,” having infamously used it to suppress boos against the Russian entry in 2015.) The EBU wanted viewers at home to see a joyous, united show, but in the arena, the political divide was palpable.
All of this left the Eurovision fan community deeply divided. Many longtime eurofans felt disillusioned, believing the integrity of the contest was compromised. Independent media outlets with a critical eye noted that Israel’s televote success was manufactured by a government public-relations blitz. On the other hand, some fans – including many in Israel – felt that their entrant was unfairly villainized and that the music got lost in politics. Eden Golan herself tried to keep the focus on music, but even she became a symbol in a larger conflict. Eurovision 2024 proved that even a glittery pop song contest is not immune to the realities of world events.
International Reactions: Spain Leads the Pushback
One of the loudest voices against Israel’s participation came from Spain. In the lead-up to Eurovision, Spain’s public broadcaster RTVE took the remarkable step of formally writing to the EBU urging an “open debate” about whether Israel should be allowed to compete. This was essentially diplomatic language for “we need to talk about kicking Israel out.” RTVE’s president José Pablo López, under pressure from Spanish civil society, acknowledged widespread public concern in Spain about the situation in Gaza and how that clashed with Israel being in a celebratory event. Spain had seen large pro-Palestine demonstrations, and many Spanish Eurovision fans felt uneasy (if not outright angry) about cheering for Israel on TV while images of Gaza’s suffering were all over the news.
The Spanish request was a bold move – rarely do broadcasters challenge the EBU openly on a specific country’s participation. However, the EBU swiftly rebuffed Spain’s call. Just hours after RTVE’s letter became public in April 2024, the EBU responded with a short statement: all members (implicitly including Israel) would participate as planned, no debate needed. They stressed they were in “constant contact” with all broadcasters (essentially telling Spain we hear you, but no). In private, other EBU members likely had differing opinions, but there was no consensus to act against Israel.
Spain didn’t drop the issue. After Eurovision 2024 ended, Spanish officials kept up the criticism. Ernest Urtasun, Spain’s acting culture minister at the time, said that many viewers were “embarrassed” by how Eurovision was used to “cover up a genocide” – extremely strong words. (It’s worth noting that in late 2023, the United Nations and International Court of Justice had warned that Israel’s actions in Gaza could constitute genocide. So Urtasun’s phrasing echoed language used by human rights bodies, not just hyperbole.) A Spanish left-wing party even delivered a petition to RTVE with thousands of signatures demanding Israel’s exclusion. By April 2025, with the war still unresolved, RTVE again asked the EBU to consider barring Israel for Eurovision 2025, citing the “feelings of Spanish viewers” and the ongoing bloodshed.
Spain was not alone. Belgium saw similar high-level pushback: both the Flemish and French Community governments publicly called for Israel’s suspension from Eurovision until the war ceased. Belgium’s two media ministers (Bénédicte Linard and Benjamin Dalle) jointly argued that if Russia was out, Israel should be too. They instructed their national broadcasters (VRT and RTBF) to raise the issue within the EBU.
Elsewhere, Slovenia’s broadcaster RTVSLO announced it would request an EBU discussion on Israel’s participation as well. In Finland, over 500 cultural figures and 10,000 citizens petitioned the Finnish broadcaster to boycott Eurovision if Israel was not banned. Even in Iceland, where the Eurovision fanbase is strong, a group of artists launched a campaign urging Nordic countries to take a stand – notable personalities like Hatari (Iceland’s 2019 Eurovision act known for its pro-Palestine stance) were vocal in this. Australia’s 2021 Eurovision singer Montaigne also spoke out, calling Israel’s actions “cruel atrocities” and suggesting Israel be dropped from the contest.
However, it appears no country was willing to unilaterally boycott Eurovision 2024 over this issue (unlike in sports, where teams sometimes walk out). Iceland’s broadcaster RÚV, for instance, confirmed it would still participate in Eurovision despite the calls, preferring not to politicize the contest from their side. The only notable internal protest during the contest came from Belgium’s VRT union: During the live broadcast of the second semi-final, unionized employees at VRT hacked the TV feed to display a message condemning Israel’s “human rights violations” and the genocide in Gaza. This was a startling event – a national broadcaster’s staff essentially interrupted Eurovision with a pro-Palestine protest on air. It only lasted moments, but it underscored how strongly some felt. (VRT’s management later explained this was a one-off union action, not an official editorial stance.)
On the ground in Malmö, public protests were impossible to ignore. Outside the arena, thousands of demonstrators gathered during the week with Palestinian flags and banners like “Boycott Israel – Eurovision Song Contest 2024”. Even Greta Thunberg, the Swedish climate activist, joined a pro-Palestine rally during Eurovision events. Inside the venue, as mentioned, audience members booed Israel’s act and chanted “Free Palestine” during rehearsals. Security for the Israeli delegation was extremely tight – reportedly, Israel’s team had Shin Bet bodyguards and at one point Eden Golan was told to remain in her hotel for safety. The tension was such that Eurovision organizers held a special meeting with all delegations to address the “unsafe environment”, after complaints that political hostility was seeping backstage.
Despite all this commotion, when the glitter settled, Israel was not expelled. No vote was ever held among EBU members on the matter. The de facto outcome was that Western solidarity around Ukraine in 2022 did not fully translate to solidarity with Palestinians in 2024. The EBU maintained that allowing Israel to compete was about fairness and keeping politics out – though critics found that stance painfully ironic.
One thing is certain: the controversy put Eurovision’s values to the test. The contest slogan was “United by Music”, yet 2024 showed the participants and viewers were anything but united on the issue of Israel. The situation also set a precedent – will future conflicts involving Eurovision countries spark similar debates? The EBU managed to prevent a fracturing this time, but it faced an unprecedented level of internal dissent and public criticism in the process.
What Can Fans and the Public Do Next?
For young people and Eurovision lovers who felt angry or disappointed about Israel’s inclusion in 2024, the big question is: What now? How can the public respond in a meaningful, positive way, without resorting to hate or ruining the spirit of Eurovision? Here are some of the actions and campaigns that emerged – all legitimate ways to make one’s voice heard:
-
Join Boycott Campaigns (or Start Your Own): In 2024, numerous grassroots campaigns urged viewers to boycott Eurovision – essentially, to not watch the broadcast or engage in its publicity – as a form of protest. Over 60 LGBTQ+ organizations worldwide, for example, banded together to call for a boycott of Eurovision 2024 due to Israel’s participation. They highlighted how Eurovision has a massive LGBTQ audience and accused the EBU of abetting Israel’s “pinkwashing” (using LGBTQ-friendly imagery to distract from human rights abuses). If you feel strongly, you can pledge to skip Eurovision or specific entries (like not streaming Israel’s song). While one person turning off the TV doesn’t make a dent in ratings, a coordinated boycott can send a powerful message. Even after Eurovision 2024, groups like the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel (PACBI) continued urging boycotts of future contests until Israel is banned.
-
Sign Petitions & Open Letters: Petitions may seem old-school, but they did have impact in this saga. The Finnish petition to Yle (with 10,000+ signatures) got national news coverage and forced Yle’s directors to address the issue. In Spain, petitions backed by celebrities gave RTVE leadership a mandate to act. Look out for campaigns on platforms like Change.org or Eko.org – for instance, one international petition in late 2023 amassed thousands of names asking the EBU to drop Israel, referencing how Russia was banned. Adding your name and sharing such petitions increases public pressure. Likewise, open letters signed by artists (like the Nordic artists’ letter calling for Israel’s ban) rely on public support and awareness to resonate. If you’re an artist or music professional yourself, consider lending your voice to these collective statements.
-
Contact Broadcasters and the EBU: Eurovision is ultimately run by the national broadcasters and the EBU. Viewers can write polite but firm messages to their country’s broadcaster (be it the BBC, RTVE, France Télévisions, etc.) expressing their discontent. Broadcasters do take audience feedback seriously. Spain’s RTVE explicitly said it acted because it “considered the feelings of Spanish viewers” who reached out with concerns. If enough fee-paying or license-paying viewers speak up, broadcasters will raise those issues at EBU meetings. You can also directly contact the EBU via their public channels or social media, although national pressure tends to be more effective.
-
Support Independent Media & Spread Information: The Eurovision saga with Israel was often muddied by misinformation or lack of information. By sharing verified news and analysis, you help keep the conversation factual and impactful. For example, when the Israeli televote campaign was exposed, independent outlets and diligent fans on Reddit brought that info to light for everyone. Ensure your peers know, for instance, that Israel’s government itself admitted to organizing voting efforts – that’s a confirmed fact, not a wild conspiracy. Similarly, highlight credible reports: e.g., Reuters confirming Israel got zero top jury scores but won 15 countries’ televotes, or BBC/Times of Israel noting thousands protested in Malmö. Sharing such facts on Twitter, Instagram, TikTok, or fan forums can shift public perception and counter official spin.
-
Protest Peacefully at Events: If you have the opportunity to attend Eurovision-related events (national finals, promo concerts, etc.), you can stage or join peaceful protests. In early 2024, activists managed to peacefully disrupt several national selection shows. For example, in Spain’s Benidorm Fest (the Eurovision qualifying contest), protesters in the audience held up Palestinian flags and signs, making headlines. Similar protests happened in Norway, Sweden, Denmark, and Finland during their live TV selection events. These demonstrations were largely respectful and aimed at reminding viewers and organizers that “normalizing” Israel’s entry was not okay. If you plan to protest, do it safely and legally – work in groups, coordinate with local pro-Palestine organizations if possible, and avoid disrupting performances (focus on sending a message during breaks or outside venues, so the artists – who aren’t personally at fault – aren’t directly harmed by it).
-
Leverage Social Media Activism: Eurovision fandom lives on social media, so that’s a battleground of its own. Participating in hashtag campaigns can amplify the message. Hashtags like #BoycottEurovision, #BanIsraelESC, or #EurovisionApartheid were used by activists during the season (though they also attracted trolls in opposition). For a younger audience, creative activism can be effective – e.g., TikTok videos explaining the issue, memes that call out EBU hypocrisy, or informative Instagram stories. The key is to keep things factual and avoid antisemitic or hateful undertones, which only discredit the cause. Emphasize human rights and fairness: e.g., pointing out the sheer number of civilian casualties in Gaza versus Eurovision’s slogan of unity, or the contrast between Russia’s ban and Israel’s free pass. By framing it as a moral consistency issue, you appeal to fellow young people’s sense of justice.
-
Encourage Artists to Speak Up: Eurovision artists themselves have a platform. In 2024 we saw some artists use it: contestants from countries like Belgium, Portugal, and Norway issued a joint statement for a Gaza ceasefire, and Sweden’s opener Eric Saade wore a Palestinian keffiyeh on stage in solidarity. If you support an artist or your country’s act, you can respectfully urge them (via social media comments, etc.) to take a stand or at least acknowledge the issue. Of course, not every singer will be comfortable doing so, but knowing their fanbase cares about this can influence them. When popular figures speak, the EBU and broadcasters feel the pressure multiplied.
-
Promote Alternative “Genocide-Free” Entertainment: One innovative form of protest during Eurovision 2024 was the creation of alternative events. Activists in Sweden organized an online event called “Falastinvision” (Falastin = Palestine) with music performances dedicated to peace, scheduled parallel to Eurovision’s final. The idea was to celebrate art and resistance without the glitz of Eurovision that, in their view, was tainted by injustice that year. Supporting such initiatives – watching their live streams, donating, sharing – not only boycotts the main event but also provides a positive outlet for one’s passion for music and human rights. It sends the message: we’re not against music or cultural exchange, we’re against using culture to cover up oppression. If Eurovision doesn’t listen, people can create the kind of cultural event they wish to see.
In expressing discontent, it’s important to stay critical but respectful. The goal most activists stress is not to attack Israeli people or the artist (Eden Golan, in this case), but to hold institutions accountable and stand against what they see as injustice. The Eurovision 2024 saga showed that fans are not powerless spectators; they are a community that can mobilize for what’s right. After all, Eurovision’s ethos is about unity and celebrating diversity. Many young Europeans interpreted that ethos as incompatible with turning a blind eye to war crimes. By engaging in the actions above, the public can keep urging Eurovision to live up to its values.
Eurovision 2024 will be remembered not just for Switzerland’s victory or catchy songs, but for the principled stands many took. It sparked a debate on how far “apoliticism” should go, and whether entertainment can truly be separate from ethics. The EBU has heard the outcry – even if it didn’t change course this time. Going forward, continued public engagement may bring about new guidelines or a rethinking of what to do when a participating country is involved in a major conflict. Change is often slow, but it starts with awareness and pressure from the ground up. In the end, whether you’re a eurofan or just someone who cares about global justice, your voice matters – be it in a petition signature, a tweet, or a chant outside an arena. The Eurovision organizers can ignore one or two complaints, but they cannot ignore a sustained movement of thousands. As the saying goes, music and politics don’t mix – yet 2024 proved they inevitably do. The public’s task is to ensure they mix in a way that bends the arc toward peace and accountability.
