Is Eurovision Still a Song Contest – Or Just a Diplomatic Minefield with Glitter?
In the wake of Eurovision 2025 in Basel, Switzerland, a growing number of European broadcasters are beginning to ask themselves (and the European Broadcasting Union) a rather uncomfortable question: Is Eurovision still apolitical? Or has it become a polite battlefield where geopolitical tensions shimmy on stage in sequins and 5/8 time signatures?
The Dutch Join the Dissent
The latest to raise eyebrows and voices are Dutch broadcasters AVROTROS and NPO. In a joint statement that sounds more like a veiled sigh than a call to arms, they expressed their “concerns regarding the position of the Eurovision Song Contest,” lamenting its increasing susceptibility to “social and geopolitical pressures.”
Translation: It’s getting awkward.
Specifically, they pointed to the participation of Israel, suggesting that it has turned the mirror back on Eurovision itself, exposing just how fragile the so-called apolitical foundation of the contest really is. They now wish to open this can of worms in a wider discussion with the EBU, and perhaps with a few colleagues who are equally disillusioned.
Who Else is Having Second Thoughts?
The Netherlands is not alone in its moment of reflection. Broadcasters from Spain (RTVE), Belgium (VRT), Iceland (RÚV), Finland (Yle), and Slovenia (RTVSLO) have all taken issue with various elements of the 2025 edition – from voting irregularities to the very presence of Israel on the scoreboard.
Finland’s Yle is particularly focused on the voting system itself. Executive producer Juha Lahti has asked the EBU to revisit the 50/50 balance between jury and public voting. While he’s not calling for a full-on musical democracy just yet, he wonders whether it’s really necessary (or logical) for a single viewer to cast twenty votes from the same sofa. A fair point, unless your telecom provider disagrees.
Meanwhile, Iceland’s RÚV is also poking around the telephone vote, politely demanding to know exactly how it was handled – or rather, why so little is known about how it was handled. Director Stefán Eiríksson confirmed they will request access to voting data, noting that “the phone vote is entirely the responsibility of the EBU,” and suggesting the current system is a bit of a black box. One might even say opaque… with a strong Wi-Fi signal.
The Israel Question
At the heart of the issue lies Israel’s continued participation during an extremely tense geopolitical period. RTVE’s commentators were famously warned against mentioning the conflict during the final – prompting a silent message for “peace and justice for Palestine” just before the broadcast began. Slovenia’s RTVSLO has now called for a wider debate on whether Israel should continue competing at all.
To be clear: this isn’t about the quality of Israel’s performance (though that too is, occasionally, up for debate). It’s about whether a show intended to unite nations through music can remain neutral when one of its participants is in the middle of a very real, very visible war.
Is Change Coming?
The EBU has so far responded with all the urgency of a bureaucratic institution on holiday. But with multiple members calling for reforms, reviews, and clarity, it’s safe to say the stage is being set for some uncomfortable – but necessary – conversations.
After all, if Eurovision wants to keep billing itself as “non-political,” it might need more than smoke machines and glitter to convince its increasingly sceptical audience.
In the meantime, the public will keep watching, voting (perhaps 20 times), and wondering if next year’s winning ballad will be the most political message of all – sung in 12 languages, under a giant LED dove.
Sources: AVROTROS/YLE/RÚV
