Contributor Dimitry Pompee is a longtime expert on the Eurovision Song Contest and a host of the award-winning Eurovangelists podcast, the most popular Eurovision podcast in North America.
This week, 18 of Spain’s most exciting singers and bands will gather in the seaside resort city of Benidorm to compete in the fifth edition of the aptly named Benidorm Fest, a televised song contest produced by the nation’s public broadcaster Radiotelevisión Española (RTVE). Since its start in 2022, Benidorm Fest has been a highlight of the Spanish cultural calendar, drawing millions of viewers domestically and boasting additional viewership in more than 80 countries. During the two semifinal rounds, artists bring an original song and pair it with a dynamic stage show in hopes of wooing enough votes from the professional jury and the Spanish public to earn a spot in the Grand Final and ultimately raise aloft the Benidorm trophy.
There can only be one winner — Benidorm Fest is a competition, after all — but it is a fantastic opportunity for artists at any stage of their careers to showcase their talent to the world.
Newcomers compete to introduce themselves to potential fans; that was the case for Vicco in 2023, who catapulted herself from anonymity to overnight success with Nochentera, an ’80s-flavored earworm that only finished at No. 3, yet was eventually went octuple platinum on the Spanish music charts and was streamed millions of times across the world, including at least one million times in my apartment alone.
Established auteurs may use their time onstage to present an unabashed sociopolitical message, as Rigoberta Bandini did at the first Benidorm Fest with her provocative feminist anthem Ay Mama. Of course, everyone wants to line their pockets with the new €100,000 prize for the winning artist (and the €50,000 prize for the winning songwriter) introduced to the Contest this year.
But for the first time in Benidorm Fest history, this year’s class will not be competing for the reward for which the show was originally created four years ago: the opportunity to represent their country in the Eurovision Song Contest. Spain's RTVE — alongside the public broadcasters of Iceland, Ireland, the Netherlands, and Slovenia — is boycotting Eurovision in protest of Israel’s participation and, more broadly, a series of organizational, ethical, and moral failings by the European Broadcasting Union (EBU).
Boycott and controversy
Israel’s participation in Eurovision has been a matter of controversy for decades, but the campaign to have the nation and its public broadcaster KAN barred from the competition kicked off in earnest shortly after Israel's current offensive in Gaza began.
As early as November 2023, just weeks after Hamas’ October 7 terrorist attack, Eurovision fans on social media were pressuring the EBU to remove Israel from the 2024 contest, citing the humanitarian crisis in Gaza caused by Israel’s military response and the indiscriminate attacks on civilians during IDF operations. Both the 2024 and 2025 editions of the Eurovision Song Contest saw waves of protests and passionate pleas for artists and viewers to boycott the show.
Public broadcasting's role
It is worth mentioning that Eurovision is a competition between national public broadcasters, not nations. Think of these as every country’s version of PBS and NPR combined. It was not the government of the United Kingdom that sent Remember Monday to Eurovision last year, it was the British Broadcasting Corporation, more commonly called the BBC. (And given Remember Monday’s result, in which they received zero points from the public, embattled prime minister Keir Starmer is probably relieved that he can’t be blamed for that.)
This distinction matters, because a core tenet of Eurovision, both the Song Contest and the eponymous pan-European broadcasting initiative, is promoting and protecting independent public broadcasting. At first, some in the Eurovision community (our podcast Eurovangelists included) placed great importance on drawing a distinct line between the Israeli government and KAN, the broadcaster.
KAN has at times reported on Israeli affairs in a manner that has drawn the ire of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his allies in the Knesset. Even now, there is a push in the legislature to privatize KAN, a move that would make it easier to apply undue government pressure to its operations and ultimately silence its independent voice.
Initial resistance to the calls for KAN’s removal were centered on the premise that the broadcaster should not be held responsible for the actions of the government. However, it would later be revealed that the current leadership of KAN was determined to use Eurovision to artwash the actions of the government, and was working in tandem with Israeli government officials to achieve that goal.
Unsound public vote system
A secondary issue driving the five countries' abstention from the 2026 Contest goes beyond Israel, but is also a relevant factor to that discussion: The Eurovision public vote system is vulnerable to abuse and drastically needs reform. In 2025, even amidst pushback and controversy, Israel’s Yuval Raphael finished No. 1 in the public vote, taking home a massive 297 points. Even though her song received a meager 60 points from the national juries, that was enough for Israel to narrowly win second place overall.
There has been rampant speculation among some fans and broadcasters that Israel must have used illicit technological means to manipulate the public vote in their favor. This is unlikely because, as the system stands now, there is no need for them to do so. Millions of people around the world watch Eurovision; the percentage of those viewers who vote during the Contest is in the single digits. As my cohost Jeremy Bent said on this very website:
It's hard to account for [Israel’s] televote popularity without recognizing that there's Eurovision viewers in every country in Europe who are sympathetic to Israel, and they're voting in support. Since it's not possible for those who oppose the Netanyahu government's actions to cast an antivote, those votes tend to carry a lot of countries for Israel … Obviously thousands of people do vote, but if even only a marginally higher percentage of a given country's Eurovision fans vote for Israel over another artist, those votes result in [a top score] for Israel from multiple nations.
Another entry from Eurovision 2025 demonstrates these concerns are not solely an issue of Israel’s result: his name is Tommy Cash. Cash is a rapper, artist, and provocateur who boasts a passionate fanbase in many European nations. (For my fellow Americans, imagine Mr. Beast, but funnier, more talented, and less annoying.) Tommy represented his home country of Estonia with the quirky "Espresso Macchiato" (a song I thoroughly despise but must admit had a captivating performance in Basel).
Estonia landed in second with the public vote, earning 258 points, a mere 39 fewer than Israel. Is it possible that Eurovision viewers who saw Espresso Macchiato developed a deep appreciation for Tommy’s humor and spent their money to vote for him in droves? Sure, that must have happened to some degree. Is it more likely that Tommy’s longtime fans and followers, mighty in number and populating many of the countries competing in Eurovision, voted for him en masse and catapulted him to a respectable third place overall? Given the outsized impact that a small group of dedicated voters can have on Eurovision’s results, absolutely.
Tommy Cash didn't do anything wrong. He didn't employ nefarious means to earn his public vote score. But he had legions ready to vote for him, regardless of the merit of the other competing acts.
And that’s the rub: this isn't against the rules as they currently stand. If you have no interest in Eurovision, but someone you utterly adore is competing, you can easily pile up your votes on them and them alone. Meanwhile, people like me, who spread our votes across several countries because there are so many great performances we want to support, have our votes diluted and spread thin. This voting process is not difficult to sway, and overt attempts to do so are not penalized in any way.
That is why Netanyahu saw fit to encourage the 1.5 million followers of his official Instagram account to vote for Yuval Raphael 20 times per person, the maximum number of votes an individual can cast with a single payment method (individuals may use up to four different payment methods, a potential maximum of 80 votes per person). This action was unfair, but it’s currently not against the rules — and that needs to change. The public vote system worked well enough in Eurovisions past, but in these times, when the Contest is more politically charged than ever, it does not produce a result that fairly reflects the true opinions of the Contest's global audience.
(There have been many other voting systems proposed to the EBU, including one that would require viewers to vote for a minimum of three countries, compelling them to spread their support among multiple competitors. The EBU has proof this system works and produces a result that is more in line with the will of the people: it's the exact voting system they use for the Junior Eurovision Song Contest.)
So after Eurovision 2025, the broadcasters representing Iceland, Ireland, the Netherlands, Slovenia, and Spain wanted 1.) new rules to address issues with the public voting system and 2.) a democratic vote among the EBU’s member broadcasters on whether or not to exclude Israel from Eurovision 2026. Of these two demands, the EBU gave them … half of one, leading the broadcasters to withdraw from the Contest. What happened?
The boycott begins
In September 2025, the board of Spain's broadcaster, RTVE, voted to withdraw from Eurovision 2026 if Israel were allowed to compete, joining the public broadcasters of Iceland, Ireland, the Netherlands, and Slovenia, who had previously made the same pledge. This list of countries is not insignificant.
- Spain has won Eurovision twice and is a member of the "Big Five," the nations that contribute the most money to the Eurovision Song Contest.
- If there were a "Big Six," the Netherlands, a five-time Eurovision winner, would be in that group due to their sizable financial contribution to the event.
- Ireland, currently tied with Sweden as the country with the most wins in Eurovision history (seven), is an iconic participant that has sent an inordinate number of the Contest’s most beloved songs.
- Iceland has never won the Contest, but has come in second twice, and was considered one of the countries most likely to take home the trophy in 2020. Their artist that year, Daði Freyr & Gagnamagnið, introduced thousands of people to Eurovision with his viral hit, "Think About Things."
- The EBU regularly expresses its worries about waning interest and declining participation in Eurovision among Eastern European countries, so it is remarkable that Slovenia has only missed one Eurovision since it started competing as an independent nation in 1993.
Likely spurred to action after the RTVE vote, the EBU soon announced that "A vote on [Israel’s participation] in the Eurovision Song Contest 2026 will take place at an extraordinary meeting of the EBU's General Assembly to be held online in early November.”
Then, in October, the vote was suddenly canceled.
On Oct. 10, 2025, a ceasefire agreement between Hamas and Israel came into effect. To begin the process, Hamas agreed to release all remaining Israeli hostages, and Israel agreed to release hundreds of Palestinian prisoners held in its jails. In response, the EBU issued a statement:
Due to recent developments in the Middle East, the EBU’s Executive Board agrees that there is a clear need for an open and in-person discussion among members concerning the issue of participation in the Eurovision Song Contest 2026.
Therefore, the matter has been added to the agenda of the regular winter General Assembly, scheduled for December, instead of an extraordinary session beforehand.
The prospect of an end to the horrific violence was welcome news (a prospect that has not yet come to pass, as the ceasefire agreement has been violated hundreds of times since it went into effect), though Eurovision fans were skeptical about why exactly this development meant the vote was canceled and the discussion about Israel had to be moved.
Still, there was cause for mild optimism, because in late November, the EBU proposed a slate of new rules designed to address broadcasters’ concerns about the public voting process ahead of Eurovision 2026:
- The maximum number of votes per individual would be reduced from 20 to 10.
- Juries would return to the semifinals. The public vote has exclusively decided which acts moved to the Grand Final since 2023.
- The EBU would enact stronger limits on third-party promotion of Eurovision acts, including government-backed campaigns.
- The EBU would deploy enhanced security measures to detect and block suspicious voting patterns.
A keen eye will note that these reforms would not totally resolve the issues with the public voting system. However, it was a promising start, and it seemed that the EBU might at last pick up the can it had been kicking for over two years.
The 2025 EBU Winter General Assembly
The first day of the 2025 EBU Winter General Assembly Meeting, Dec. 4, 2025, will forever be one of the darkest days in the history of the Eurovision Song Contest.
There was a long discussion between the EBU’s member broadcasters about the current Eurovision rules, proposed improvements, and Israel’s participation/possible exclusion. Spain, along with seven other countries, had requested a secret ballot to determine whether or not to exclude Israel from Eurovision 2026, and for a time, it looked like the EBU, a bastion of democratic values in public broadcasting, might finally let its members have a final say in this matter.
But first, the members had to vote on the new proposed rules.
Procedural dishonesty
The time had come for the EBU’s masterstroke, a move of legislative chicanery that would make Mitch McConnell green with envy.
EBU leadership suddenly decreed that there would be two separate votes: one on the new rules, and one on Israel’s participation in Eurovision 2026. Except, the second vote was bound to the failure of the first. That is, if the member broadcasters failed to approve the new slate of rules, only then there would be a vote on Israel. If, however, the members approved the new rules, there would be no vote on Israel and KAN would be allowed to compete in 2026.
The proposed rules, which appeal to many of the broadcasters’ longest-held concerns and are helpful in many ways, were overwhelmingly approved by the members: 738 votes in favor, 264 against, and 120 abstentions.
I will borrow from the statement our podcast made in the immediate aftermath of this decision:
The EBU’s parliamentary chicanery in handling this vote was shameful. To deny the broadcasters an up-or-down vote on BOTH issues [i.e., the new rules and Israel’s participation], regardless of what the result would have been, is undemocratic and a craven abdication of what the EBU is supposed to stand for.
We were not alone in our outrage.
Millions of Eurovision fans finally saw the truth: The EBU, an institution that we believed advocated for independent public broadcasting and peace through cultural exchange, the founder and parent of our beloved Eurovision Song Contest, was just as corrupt as FIFA. The organization’s leadership demonstrated that there is no limit to how dishonorable it is willing to be in order to achieve its own desired result. The broadcasting union — that for 70 years had promoted love, understanding, acceptance, and cooperation through music — was morally bankrupt. Instead of letting the member broadcasters speak freely and determine the future of the Eurovision Song Contest, the EBU put its thumb on the scale.
There is absolutely no reason these two issues should have been inextricably linked, and to do so was an act of malfeasance that exposed rot at the heart of the EBU. The broadcasters of Ireland, the Netherlands, Slovenia, and Spain could no longer take it. They all announced their boycott of Eurovision 2026 within minutes of the final vote tally. Iceland’s broadcaster voted to join them six days later.
The EBU gone rotten
Fan and broadcaster fury at the EBU’s corruption only grew when the world found out just how extensive the behind-the-scenes lobbying effort was in the months before the General Assembly meeting. KAN’s leadership and legal team had been speaking directly with EBU leaders and members, trying to find ways to prevent a vote about Israel from occurring.
Israeli President Isaac Herzog personally contacted key international partners, urging them to oppose a potential vote and instead back a compromise package of rules that would "ease tensions inside the EBU." Herzog even met with Ronald Weissmann, the CEO of Austria’s public broadcaster ORF (the hosting broadcaster of Eurovision 2026), in Israel months before the EBU Winter General Assembly meeting. During his visit, Weissman himself said, "This is a time for diplomacy — both behind the scenes and in the open," suggesting an effort to influence the outcome of any vote was in motion well in advance of the member meeting.
This is not how decisions about the Eurovision Song Contest should be made. This is not how a democratic institution, one that actively fights authoritarian attempts to control its member broadcasters, is supposed to operate. This is why Eurovision fans across the globe feel hurt, shocked, and betrayed by the EBU. And it's why five member broadcasters are boycotting the Contest in 2026 and for the foreseeable future.
What’s Happening Now? What’s Next?
We're a few months into the current Eurovision season and, thanks to the EBU’s mismanagement of the entire situation, there is a precipitous decline in enthusiasm for this year’s Contest.
Fans across the world are pledging not to watch the show. Every post on Eurovision social media pages is barraged with furious messages lambasting the organization’s corruption until comments are inevitably locked, the offending remarks swiftly deleted. Some of the most prominent content creators and fan commentators have ceased operations in protest. Legacy events that have become sacred gatherings on the Eurovision calendar are being cancelled in solidarity with the boycotting broadcasters. Former Eurovision winners are returning their trophies.
Never in my more than two decades of following this Contest have I ever seen the spirit of the community so low. Vladimir Putin and Viktor Orbán could only dream of damaging Eurovision’s reputation to the extent that the EBU did in December.
What can we do now?
The conflict Eurovision fans feel within themselves is staggering. Many of us are torn between wanting to express our disgust with the EBU while fighting to preserve the good of the Song Contest. Both of these are worthy goals, and here are some steps you can take to achieve them.
Reject antisemitism. Call it out when you see it. We are experiencing a global rise in hate speech being normalized and an increase in violence against Jewish and Israeli people. Regrettably, the Eurovision community is not immune to this strain of virulent hatred. Antisemitism runs contrary to the unity Eurovision is supposed to promote, and it cannot be tolerated. Opposition to the actions of the Israeli government, KAN, and the EBU is not an excuse to let hate go unchecked.
Don’t spend money on Eurovision. Don’t buy a ticket to any Eurovision-branded events, including the semifinals, the Grand Final, and the newly announced postcontest summer tour that’s sure to be a logistical and financial disaster. Don’t purchase any merchandise. (Thankfully, the new items in the official Eurovision shop are so hideous and expensive, it’ll be easy not to spend a dollar on those eyesores.)
Watch the national finals. These are the song selection competitions that the national broadcasters use to pick their Eurovision songs, but each one is much more than that. Moldova’s recent final, Selecția Națională, is an excellent example. Not only did the show honor Moldova’s Eurovision legacy and unique musical culture, the winning song, Satoshi’s Viva, Moldova!, is a joyful anthem that celebrates the republic months after Moldovan voters soundly defeated a blatant attempt by pro-Russian political parties to turn the country into a vassal state for the Kremlin.
Similarly, Ukraine’s national final, Vidbir, has become a vital cultural tool in their continued resistance to Russia’s invasion. And of course, Spain’s Benidorm Fest is completely divorced from Eurovision and is now an iconic event in and of itself.
The stories of these competitions and their artists matter, and should not be disregarded because of the EBU’s buffoonery. Whenever possible, try to watch the national finals using the streams on the broadcasters’ websites or YouTube channels instead of the stream provided by the official Eurovision YouTube channel.
And finally, there is the question of whether or not to boycott watching Eurovision itself. I will assign no guilt or shame to those who choose to watch the Contest in Vienna. There is nothing like the Eurovision Song Contest, and there is nothing that can replace it in the hearts of its fans. I will reserve my shaming exclusively for the EBU.
If you do choose to boycott Eurovision, I would encourage you to let the EBU know exactly why you’re doing so. The Eurovision website says, “Public enquiries, questions and suggestions can be sent to info@eurovision.tv.” I’m sure they would love to hear all of your thoughts, feelings, complaints, criticisms, and concerns. And don’t forget the opportunity to leave feedback on the Contest's social media accounts!
This is arguably the worst time in the history of the Eurovision Song Contest. But I believe this important institution can still be saved. All it will take is convincing the EBU to live by the values it purports to promote. Somehow, that task is harder than it should be, and on some days, it feels impossible. However, Eurovision is an objective boon to this world. Its soul — summed up in its slogan, "United by Music" — is worth fighting to preserve, even if that means opposing the very group that organizes it.
I hope you’ll join me in the effort to bring the EBU back to its senses.
If you haven't already, consider supporting worker-owned media by subscribing to Pop Heist. We are ad-free and operating outside the algorithm, so all dollars go directly to paying the staff members and writers who make articles like this one possible.
