EUROVISION 2024: United by Music…or not?

This edition of the Eurovision Song Contest held in Malmö might have been the most politicised ever, marked by large protests, bans and an unexpected disqualification. The controversies surrounding the event started before it was aired and certainly are not over after it has ended. Can we really be united by music if politics cannot (and should not?) be out of it? 

Mara Vos Carrero & Matilde Forno

The roots of the Eurovision Song Contest (ESC), or simply Eurovision, trace back all the way to the aftermath of the Second World War. When European countries were trying to rebuild a peaceful space, and televisions were becoming one of the new and most important information tools, the idea of a singing festival blossomed as a way to combine the two trends. The idea came from Sergio Pugliese, who proposed to start a music festival that would reunite all the countries in Europe, drawing from the Italian example of Sanremo, the most important song festival in the country.

The very first Eurovision contest aired in Lugano on May 24th 1956, with the participation of seven countries: Switzerland, the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, France, Luxembourg and Italy. While back then it was mainly perceived as a technical experiment in television broadcasting, in 2024 it saw the participation of thirty-seven countries transcending the European borders by also including Armenia, Azerbaijan, Israel and, of course, Australia, among others. 

Eurovision has come a long way since its first editions, changing its rules and adapting rapidly to an evolving context. Throughout its history, the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) has gradually adjusted its guidelines, following the needs of the competition. A time limit for the songs was introduced (3 minutes), as well as a closed number of possible artists (6) on stage and the decision for the winning country to host the following edition.

Probably one of the most influential changes was the possibility of singing in any language regardless of the nationality represented. This last factor, on one side, enabled songs that are written in widely spoken languages to become more popular and accessible to the public, while on the other, it partly lost the cultural, linguistic dimension of the event that aimed to join different cultures through music.

With time, Eurovision ended up becoming one of the most renowned non-sportive events worldwide, followed by over 150 million people on average. The reason behind its incredible success is the result of a combination of several factors. For instance, an increasing number of artists and countries participated in the contest and iconic hits were produced through the years, namely Waterloo from ABBA and Zitti e Buoni by Måneskin, which won the 1974 and 2021 editions.  Besides the popularity of the songs, the controversies of the most recent editions surely gave Eurovision an even broader media resonance. 

Even though Eurovision aimed to promote unity and peace while remaining apolitical from the beginning, it has more often than not stumbled into disputes and scandals, making the intrusion of politics into the song contest not a new factor. For instance, Spain’s participation during Franco’s regime led to various controversial episodes in the early times of the ESC, the peak of which was reached during the 1969 edition in Madrid, which not only witnessed Austria’s refusal to participate due to the “state of exception” imposed by the state, but it also saw the exclusive participation of 500 dirigeants of the regime inside the venue, restricting the rest of journalists and public to a separate area where the show was broadcasted on a TV screen to avoid undesired gestures against the dictatorship.

This is just one example of the intrinsicality of politics in the ESC. But if politics has always been connected to this event, what was so special about this Eurovision edition? 

The world is facing difficult and complex times: with the ongoing war in Ukraine and the developments of the conflict in Gaza, their repercussions to the entire world and the narratives surrounding them have become central to the protests that rose in Malmö. This year’s contest started to be particularly controversial even before it began, with the decision to keep Israel in the competition after excluding Russia from the contest back in 2022 when its troops invaded Ukraine.

Many have been referring to these decisions from the EBU as ‘double standards’, as many people had very different stances towards Israel’s participation at the ESC. The position of the EBU on the matter was rather interesting, as Luvetic said that 'the European Broadcasting Union doesn't have a political mandate to ban Israel, as it did with Russia'.

Israel’s controversies do not end with its participation. When it was decided that the country was to join the 2024 edition, they were required to change the song’s lyrics because they were considered to be ‘too political’. In fact, the song's original title would have been ‘October Rain’, a clear allusion to the events of October 7th, but was then changed into ‘Hurricane’. Israel’s state broadcaster, Kan, ‘initially refused to change the song, saying it would prefer to withdraw from the contest - but Israel's President, Isaac Herzog, later called for "necessary adjustments" to ensure the country could participate’.

A large number of protests outside the arena in Malmö and throughout Europe displayed disagreements regarding Israel's participation. Additionally, it was reported that the booing during the performance of the artist Eden Golan was covered by recorded sounds of applause and cheering. Despite the general disapproval of this country’s participation, the public vote rewarded it by conferring 323 points to Israel, the second-highest score, which helped settle its position at fifth place.

Another example worth mentioning connected to the events is the actions taken by the Irish contestant Bambie Thug. Because of the impossibility of bringing inside the arena any politically affiliated objects, she used Celtic runes from the ancient Ogham alphabet on her makeup to display messages of peace and ‘ceasefire’, but these were recognised, and she was asked to remove them.

The other major point of discussion for this year’s edition revolved around the exclusion of the Dutch singer Joost Klein. Paradoxically, despite the problems other delegations also had, the young artist was the one who ended up excluded, even though he wrote what could be seen as a European anthem: ‘Europapa’, a song describing a world with no borders among people.

The reasons behind his exclusion have been obscure during the competition and were properly discussed only after the finals, not without lifting a massive media storm in support of the Dutchman. The initial speculations revolved around a possible disagreement with Israel's delegation. Still, the EBU discarded these accusations, stating that he ‘was disqualified from the Grand Final of this year’s Eurovision Song Contest following threatening behaviour directed at a female member of the production crew. Swedish police have investigated the offence, and the case will soon be handed over to the prosecutor in an accelerated procedure’.

Following the numerous reactions supporting the artist on the web and the response from the Dutch broadcasting agency generated by his exclusion, in July 2024, the EBU made a statement on its independent review. It decided that a new director would be proposed to take the organisation's lead and promised clearer and easier rules for the delegations and artists. As stated by the deputy director of the EBU, De Tender, 'We have a duty of care for the artists as well, but also the artists need to understand that if you participate in the Eurovision Song Contest, what are the rules you’re contracting to?'

What appears to be evident is the contradictions between EBU’s insistence on the non-political nature of the event, even when politics was rarely able not to be involved, and especially with years like this, remarkably proving the paradox. The reflections we could draw upon this case can be part of a broader discussion on the possibility of actually excluding geopolitical concerns from the world of the arts. Would it be a fairer initiative? Are they really so categorically separate?

The arts sphere is not the only concerned one, as state participation in international competitions has been a controversial topic of increasing interest in 2024, considering the Olympic games will also be held in Europe this summer, replicating the same geopolitical matrix. These events portray themselves as impartial and forcibly unpolitical, but is it true that politics is actually able to stay out of them?

Historically, many individuals have stepped up for their rights on stage, even when politics was not openly mentioned. Foremost, Jesse Owens, who in 1936, at the Olympics in Berlin discredited the Aryan superiority in front of the propaganda of the regime with his victory. This created resonance even years later when, in 1968 athletes Tommie Smith and John Carlos ‘stepped onto the podiums at the Olympics wearing black stockings and raised their fist covered by a black glove in a Black Power salute’, consequently being punished with a suspension from the games.

Athletes and artists are renowned for their talent in their respective fields, not for their political views. Being constantly in the spotlight does not mean their political beliefs should be shared or embraced by the public. For instance, Turkish football player Merih Demiral was suspended by UEFA for a controversial gesture during the Euro 2024 game against Germany. This incident illustrates that despite their visibility, their political opinions are not the basis for their fame and should not be automatically validated.

What we can state for sure is that today, the protests surrounding the Olympic games have become, once again, very politicised, and the Eurovision was no different. In the end, historical and contemporary times offer plenty of examples of celebrities who engage in political campaigns to fight for their beliefs and rights. We wonder though, are they the people who are supposed to problematise sensitive issues such as war or social justice?

Despite the controversies, engagement in these events has always been particularly high and will probably continue to rise. The EBU's upcoming adjustments to the regulations and Joost Klein's possibility of participating in the 2025 ESC are the perfect elements to make us hope for a new, fiery edition of the Eurovision Song Contest!