In parts one and two of this report we documented how BBC coverage of the Eurovision boycotts consistently left out key information and context, including in its own reporting, relating to accusations levelled at Israel ranging from rule breaking and vote stacking, to false equivalence with Russia and accusations of manufactured famine and genocide in the Gaza Strip.
It therefore comes as no surprise to find that the December 4th edition of the BBC Radio 4 programme ‘The World Tonight’ titled “Four Countries Boycott Eurovision over Israel” echoed that framing, with music correspondent Mark Savage reporting as follows:
Savage: “This has been brewing for two years, ever since Israel invaded Gaza after the deadly Hamas attacks on the 7th October 2023 there have been calls for it to be expelled from the competition in the same way Russia was after it invaded Ukraine. Today in Geneva eight countries led by Spain tried to call a vote on Israel’s future in the contest but that request was denied by the organisers. Instead they put forward a raft of proposals about tightening up the public vote procedure because there had been complaints last year that Israel had tried to stack the public vote in their favour through a large advertising campaign on social media and even a post on Instagram from the Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu telling people how to cast their votes for the Israeli act Yuval Raphael.”
As has been consistent in BBC reporting on this story, Mark Savage failed to point out that the EBU had cleared Israel of any rule breaking regarding last year’s voting, despite the BBC itself having reported that on May 21st.
Later in the segment at 13:08 presenter Jane Hill interviewed Natalija Gorscak, the Chair of Slovenia’s national Broadcaster RTV. Alongside the discredited allegations of vote stacking and unfairness, Natalija Gorscak accused Israel of “abusing Eurovision” for a political purpose:
Gorscak: “Israel abused Eurovision song contest for a political performance and that’s a fact”
That allegation was based on the fact that Israeli singer Yuval Raphael had survived the Nova festival massacre. Rather than presenting any push back or providing context concerning Yuval Raphael’s ordeal at the hands of Hamas on October 7th 2023, BBC presenter Jane Hill simply appeared to agree, leaving listeners to assume her interviewee’s position is reasonable.
Natalija Gorcsak: “last year Israel was sending a person who survived the horrible attack, I must say I’m sorry for all the people who died and it was horrible what happened in Israel, but it doesn’t give, you know, the right to anybody to kill back, this is just not correct, like from the human point of view, and our viewers and listeners and users they were last year you know they were really angry when they saw that. We got so many letters you know, so many petitions you know, how could we you know be there on the stage with a real political provocation?”
Jane Hill: “Because the singer who represented Israel in May was a survivor of the Nova music festival attack.”
The BBC cannot claim to be ignorant of the circumstances of Yuval Raphael’s survival of October 7th. They themselves reported her horrific ordeal on May 13th :
“On that day – one and a half years ago – Ms Raphael was attending her first outdoor rave. As rockets were fired from Gaza into Israel, and Hamas gunmen started shooting at revellers, she attempted to flee the carnage.
She and her friends took refuge in a concrete bomb shelter at the side of a road. Around 50 people were crammed in, lying on top of each other.
But there was no escape as the gunmen shot repeatedly into the mass of bodies in the shelter and then threw in hand grenades.
Ms Raphael managed to call her father in tears, as heard in a recording played in an Israeli documentary. “Dad, lots of people are dead. Send the police here. Please dad, send the police, it’s urgent.. they’re crushing me,” she said.
“Be quiet,” he replied. “Yuvali my daughter. Yuvali, breathe deep. Hide. Play dead.”
“Bye,” she said, thinking that was the end.
Ms Raphael was one of only 11 people in the shelter to survive. She hid under a pile of dead bodies for eight hours until they were rescued.”
Ms Gorscak then raised another issue concerning Yuval Raphael’s performance last year.
Gorscak: “…and also the song it was a symbolic song but it was, you know in symbolic way it was a political song”
Yuval Raphael’s song “A New Day Will Rise” includes the lyrics:
“And even if you say goodbye, you’ll never go away,
You are the rainbow in my sky, my colours in the grey,
My only wish upon a star, sunshine in the day,
The only song that my piano ever plays,
And even if you say goodbye you’ll always be around
To lift me up and take me high, keep my feet close to the ground,
Are you proud of me tonight? Dreams are comin’ true,
I chose the light, nothin’ to lose if I lose you”
While it is a song that undeniably speaks to immense grief, there is no political content in the lyrics. Once again, rather than challenging that assertion or adding that context, Hill tacitly agreed and moved on, leaving the average listener, who may not have even heard the song, to believe that it was indeed political and therefore broke Eurovision’s stringent rules on political content, and suggesting that Israeli grief is as inherently suspicious and political as Yuval’s very survival.
This is not the first time the BBC has indulged the accusation of political theatre by Israel at Eurovision. On the BBC News at Ten programme on December 5th Mark Savage stated:
Savage: “Spain’s broadcaster in particular has been critical of what it calls the mismanagement of the Eurovision Song Contest over the Israel argument and says that even with the ceasefire in Gaza, Israel’s use of the contest for political purposes makes it hard to maintain the contest’s neutrality.”
The language used to describe that accusation from Spain’s national broadcaster suggests to BBC audiences that it is a fact that Israel uses the contest for political purposes rather than merely an allegation.
In the context of an international contest – the rules and minutiae of which will be unfamiliar to the vast majority of BBC listeners and viewers – the unchallenged promotion of such serious allegations conflicts with the BBC’s obligation to provide balanced, impartial, accurate and informed coverage of this heated debate.
