Visitors to the BBC News website’s ‘Eurovision Song Contest’ page in recent days cannot have failed to notice a plethora of reports relating to boycotts.
The December 5th report headlined “Boycotts and arguments – can the Eurovision Song Contest survive its biggest crisis?”, which is credited to Mark Savage and Ian Youngs, tells readers that:
“The row exposes a deep rift within the Eurovision family. And it’s a situation that’s been looming for years, amid festering tension over Israel’s conduct during the war in Gaza.”
Remarkably, Mark Savage has nothing to tell BBC audiences about a similar boycott campaign which he and other BBC journalists uncritically amplified six years ago – long before “the war in Gaza” began.
CONTEXT-FREE AMPLIFICATION OF EUROVISION BOYCOTT CALLS PERSISTS AT BBC NEWS
The report continues: [emphasis added]
“There has also been consternation over the voting and campaigning processes after Israel came top of the public vote this year – finishing second overall after the jury votes were taken into account.”
And:
“Jose Pablo Lopez said he had lost faith in Eurovision’s organisers, saying they had been swayed by “political and commercial interests”.
He added that organisers should have addressed Israel’s alleged manipulation of the public vote should have resulted in sanctions “at an executive level”, instead of asking EBU members to decide on any consequences.
Israel denies attempting to influence voting at the contest, and says its publicity campaigns were acceptable within Eurovision rules.”
Apparently culture reporter Ian Youngs has forgotten that on May 21st 2025 he wrote a report headlined “Israel’s Eurovision result prompts questions over voting” in which readers were told that:
“Israel’s success in the public vote at last weekend’s Eurovision Song Contest has prompted calls from a string of countries to examine the results and voting system.
Singer Yuval Raphael came top of the viewer vote on Saturday with her ballad New Day Will Rise, but finished second overall to Austria when jury scores were also taken into account.
Broadcasters in Ireland, the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Iceland and Finland have since raised concerns or questions about the public vote, with some requesting an audit.
Eurovision organisers the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) said the vote had been independently checked and verified, that they took any concerns seriously. […]
In response, the contest’s director Martin Green said organisers were “in constant contact with all participating broadcasters” and “take their concerns seriously”. […]
“It is important to emphasise that the voting operation for the Eurovision Song Contest is the most advanced in the world and each country’s result is checked and verified by a huge team of people to exclude any suspicious or irregular voting patterns.
“An independent compliance monitor reviews both jury and public vote data to ensure we have a valid result.
“Our voting partner Once has confirmed that a valid vote was recorded in all countries participating in this year’s Grand Final and in the Rest of the World.”
Youngs also provided readers of that report with a link to an external article:
“Eurovision News, which is operated by the EBU, said an agency of the Israeli government paid for adverts and used state social media accounts to encourage people to vote for the Israeli entry.
Mr Green said that did not break the rules.”
That report from ‘Eurovision News’ notes that “promoting a country’s entry is permitted”, that “other entrants also advertised” and that “despite social media speculation about the public vote, there is no evidence of any issues or irregularities with the result”. It also quotes the contest’s director Martin Green:
“The Eurovision Song Contest’s rules are designed to ensure a fair and neutral competition. These rules do not prohibit participating broadcasters or third parties such as record labels or others from promoting their entries online and elsewhere, as long as such promotion does not instrumentalize the Contest or breach its editorial guidelines. Many delegations employ paid promotion campaigns to support the song, profile, and future careers of their artists.”
Moreover, Youngs also linked to that same ‘Eurovision News’ article in a November 21st report he wrote together with Lauren Turner titled “Eurovision tightens rules after Israel voting controversy”:
“Fans will now be able to cast 10 votes each, down from 20, and juries will return for the semi-finals.
Organisers will also ban contestants and broadcasters from taking part in promotional campaigns by third parties including governments. Last year, there were reports that an Israeli government agency paid for adverts and used state social media accounts to encourage people to vote for its entry.”
In other words, Savage and Youngs’ December 5th promotion of the notion of “alleged manipulation of the public vote”, as expressed by the president of the Spanish public broadcaster, misleads BBC audiences.
The same goes for a report written by Mark Savage a day earlier on December 4th – “Eurovision faces crucial decision over Israel” – in which BBC audiences were told that:
“Organisers and participating countries will debate whether Israel should be allowed to continue in the competition, amid protests over the way its government conducted its war in Gaza, and accusations of unfair voting practices. […]
However, the result triggered a backlash from other countries, who said Israel’s government had artificially boosted their position through a broad, paid-for advertising campaign, urging people across Europe to vote for their song.”
Similar wording appears in another report by Savage published on December 4th under the headline “Ireland among countries boycotting Eurovision after Israel allowed to compete”.
“Ireland, Spain, the Netherlands and Slovenia will boycott the 2026 Eurovision Song Contest, after it was decided Israel could compete.
They were among a number of countries who had called for Israel to be excluded over the war in Gaza and accusations of unfair voting practices. […]
Approximately 50 broadcasters, including the BBC, attended an EBU meeting on Thursday to discuss the future of the contest, which is watched by more than 150 million people each year.
They were asked to back new rules intended to discourage governments and third parties from organising voting campaigns for their acts, after allegations that Israel unfairly boosted its entrant, Yuval Raphael, this year.”
In other words, over six months after the BBC had reported that the public vote at the May 2025 Eurovision Song Contest was a “valid vote” which did “not break the rules” and that “no evidence of issues or irregularities” had been found by the organisers, Ian Youngs and Mark Savage continue to promote claims of “unfair voting practices” and “alleged manipulation of the public vote”.
That, however, is far from the only issue arising from the BBC’s Eurovision coverage, as will be seen in part two of this post.
