Cowardly reporting. "Death to the IDF" isn't nearly the same as "death to Jews". Bob Vylan wasn't being antisemitic, he was being anti-israel at worst.
this post was submitted on 08 Jul 2025
9 points (80.0% liked)
Eurovision Song Contest
540 readers
20 users here now
A place for all fans of the Eurovision Song Contest :D
Rules:
- No discrimination. This explicitely includes racism, homophobia, transphobia, sexism. Don't be a jerk.
- Please be nice, friendly and welcoming. Criticism and discussions and okay, but don't hate on people for their opinions.
- Relevance to the Eurovision Song Contest. This space is made for the ESC, so all posts should be at least somewhat related to it.
Rules may be added or changed if necessary.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I want to know why countries that support Israel's inclusion in Eurovision don't believe bombing Palestinians is the same as bombing Ukrainians. The article doesn't answer that fundamental question. Why is it right to ban Russia but "complicated" to ban Israel?
I think I know the answer and it's pretty easy to answer. Fundamental deeply entrenched racism. But nobody wants to admit that. Palestinians are, unfortunately, the wrong kind of massacred people.
Yeah that article is surprisingly shit. The reason, according to EBU, is that Russia's state owned broadcaster that was representing them in Eurovision, Channel One, was considered a propaganda outlet. The EBU rules don't allow their members to broadcast propaganda.
The Israeli state owned broadcaster representing them in Eurovision, KAN, is not considered a propaganda outlet (according to EBU). While it is true that Channel One has less independence than KAN, I'd argue they both qualify as propaganda outlets.
Like the other guy already said, for the EBU the argument is always about the broadcasting stations, not the countries itself.
It reads like the member stations would have currently a majority to ban KAN for one year (2026), but didn't vote on it.