How did Israel turn the Eurovision stage into a tool of soft power?

Last fall and winter, senior Israeli diplomats urgently contacted officials and television broadcasters across Europe over a sensitive, if unexpected, topic: the decidedly kitschy Eurovision Song Contest.

Broadcasters wanted to ban Israel from the Eurovision Song Contest and threatened to boycott the contest because of the war in Gaza. Some even accused the Israeli government of influencing the results with a massive voting campaign.

Israel probably had bigger diplomatic concerns than a pop music competition, even one watched by 166 million viewers worldwide. A United Nations panel recently accused Israel of genocide, a charge the country has vehemently denied. World leaders have recognized Palestinian statehood, something Israel has long opposed.

“I am a bit surprised why the embassy is dealing with this issue,” Stefan Eiriksson, head of Icelandic public television, wrote to an Israeli diplomat who wanted to discuss Eurovision in December.

This previously undisclosed diplomatic push to keep Israel in the Eurovision Song Contest was just one part of the drama that has unfolded over the past year around the world's most watched cultural event. For the Israeli government, the Eurovision Song Contest has become more than a celebration of sequined costumes, gay pride, and pyrotechnic stage performances. It has become an opportunity to repair the country's tarnished reputation and garner international support through the good placements of its singers.

This year's contest begins today, after the biggest crisis in the 70-year history of the Eurovision Song Contest. Iceland and four other countries are boycotting the contest in protest at Israel's participation. The non-profit European Broadcasting Union, which organizes the contest, is facing financial challenges.

A New York Times investigation found that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government conducted a well-organized campaign in which it embraced the Eurovision Song Contest as a tool of soft power, while the secretive organizer of the competition proved unwilling to respond.

As the otherwise lighthearted competition became a proxy battle over Middle Eastern issues and human rights, Eurovision had difficulty defending one of its core principles: that politics play no role in the event.

Israel's efforts to influence the Eurovision vote were broader and began years earlier than previously known. Even before the controversy over the vote became public, financial records show that Israel had spent at least $1 million on Eurovision-related marketing. Some of that money came from Netanyahu's "hasbara" office (a euphemism for propaganda abroad) to promote the Israeli singer.

The Israeli Foreign Ministry did not respond to detailed requests for comment.

A spokesman for Netanyahu's office said he would review the questions and decide whether to respond. He did not respond.

Eurovision director Martin Green said in an interview that Israel's actions last year were excessive, but that they did not contribute to Israel's unexpected second place.

However, a Times investigation, based on previously unpublished voting data, Eurovision documents and interviews with more than 50 people, showed that the campaign could easily have changed the outcome of the competition.

The Israeli singer won the public vote in countries where polls show Israel to be very “unpopular.” Analysis of the votes shows that in some countries, just a few hundred people were enough to sway the public vote, which can then shape the final outcome due to the contest's voting system.

There is no evidence that Israel, as some Eurovision fans have speculated, used bots or other underhanded tactics to manipulate the vote.

The organizers kept the full voting data a closely guarded secret, even from their own broadcasters. Faced with internal rebellion and threats from Israeli allies to abandon the contest, they publicly downplayed the significance of the Israeli voting campaign and never thoroughly investigated it.

The contest organizers commissioned an analysis of broadcasters' attitudes toward Israel, but kept the full report secret. They called a vote on whether Israel should stay in the contest, then abruptly canceled it. They discouraged broadcasters from speaking to reporters.

"The Israeli government has taken over Eurovision," said the chairman of the board of directors of the Icelandic public broadcaster, Stefan Jon Hafstein.

Buying ads and coordinating messages on social media are not illegal. Eurovision is, after all, just a singing competition — albeit the world’s largest. But while governments often try to capitalize on the publicity their singers bring them, no government-led promotional effort has been as extensive and controversial as Israel’s.

"Israel's voice should be heard everywhere," said ceremonial Israeli President Isaac Herzog, who raised the issue of the boycott in meetings with world leaders last year. "We should participate, we should raise our flag high and we should send the best performers to Eurovision."

The Eurovision Song Contest, which once launched the international careers of ABBA and Celine Dion, faces an uncertain future. Financial projections reviewed by The Times last year estimated that the boycott would cost the nonprofit broadcasting group hundreds of thousands of dollars in entry fees. Green said Eurovision's finances were stable, but acknowledged that it was struggling to find sponsors.

"It's certainly one of the biggest challenges we've faced," Green said of the controversy over Israel. But the Eurovision Song Contest, he added, exists to showcase global harmony — "to show the world what it could be."

This is the inside story of the controversy that almost broke the Eurovision Song Contest.

Eurovision Song Contest as soft power

In May 2024, fans gathered in the Swedish coastal city of Malmö for the first Eurovision Song Contest since the start of the Gaza war.

Despite its name, Eurovision brings together singers and broadcasters from all over the world. Israel debuted in 1973. Musicians compete under national flags, but the performances are financed by broadcasters.

At the time, there was no clear rule prohibiting state promotion, but independence is one of the basic principles of Eurovision.

Still, the Israeli government has been quietly promoting its broadcaster’s performances since at least 2018, according to Doron Medali, a former Israeli Eurovision songwriter. The government spent more than $100.000 on social media promotion that year, he said. Israel won.

Medali said that the victory "convinced Israeli leaders that Eurovision is a good investment."

Netanyahu's government increased its budget ahead of the Malmo competition, data shows.

European public opinion was against the war, and some music organizations were already calling for Israel to be kicked out of the Eurovision Song Contest. A good showing for Israel would show that the European public likes the country, according to Israeli officials. They, like some people close to Eurovision, spoke on condition of anonymity, either because they were not authorized to speak publicly or because they feared reprisals from the contest organizers.

In Malmö, the Israeli government spent more than $800.000 on Eurovision-related advertising, according to data from the Israeli Government Advertising Agency. The data, obtained by the Israeli media watchdog The Seventh Eye and provided to The Times, shows that the bulk of the money came from the Foreign Ministry. One entry from the prime minister’s office for hasbara shows that it also allocated money to “voting promotion.”

Israeli public broadcaster Kan told The Times that it had no prior knowledge of the government's advertising campaigns and that, to its knowledge, "the rules of the competition were not violated."

In 2024, Israeli singer Eden Golan came in second place in the public vote and won the vote in many countries where “pro-Palestinian sentiment” is strong. “The world, it seems, is not against us,” wrote the Israeli portal Ynet.

Ynet reported that the Foreign Ministry advertised on YouTube during the Eurovision Song Contest. But the story, as well as the unusual voting patterns, otherwise attracted little attention.

Eurovision broadcasters were preoccupied with other things. Activist Greta Thunberg and thousands of others gathered in Malmö, protesting Israel's participation. Several singers wore Palestinian symbols on stage. Dutch rapper Jost Klein was ejected for an unrelated incident with a camerawoman.

But one broadcaster, from Slovenia, noticed the unusual voting results and asked Eurovision to release more information. The organizers never responded, the broadcaster said.

Eurovision announced last week that it had not judged any of Israel's 2024 promotions to be excessive.

The Eurovision Song Contest left Malmö behind, but its problems were just beginning.

"Vote 20 times!"

At Eurovision 2025 in Basel, Switzerland, Israel came in second place overall and won the public vote — once again winning over countries where people had spoken out openly against Israeli policies.

This time unexpected results were observed.

Using Google's archive of ads and commercials, journalists from Finnish broadcaster Yle discovered that the Israeli government had purchased online ads in multiple languages, urging people to vote for Israeli representative Yuval Rafael a maximum of 20 times.

Spending data for that competition is not available, but the Israeli campaign was broader and more coordinated than in Malmo.

Netanyahu himself posted a graphic on social media encouraging people to vote 20 times for Rafael. Pro-Israel groups across Europe have posted the same and similar graphics. The Israeli deputy ambassador to Austria, Eli Levi Yudkovski, told The Times that he had contacted a diaspora group to rally support for Rafael.

Medali, an Israeli songwriter, defended the strategy. Israel spends so much on security, he said, that it was only fair that the government fund the promotion.

"Everyone is jealous and provoked because Israel is achieving great results," he said.

Israel's promotional efforts could easily have influenced public voting, an analysis of voting data showed. The reason is that in some countries, according to the data, so few people vote that just a few hundred people voting multiple times could have changed the outcome.

After the competition, the Slovenian broadcaster again requested voting data and threatened to withdraw. Others privately demanded an external investigation.

Green, the director, promised that the Eurovision governing body would review the vote. But the group never received a full analysis of the votes, only “basic” data, Green admitted.

Neither he nor the broadcasting union commissioned an independent investigation.

"We are very, very pleased that the result is truthful, fair and analyzed," Green said.

In July, at a broadcasters' meeting in London, discontent grew. Spain called for a discussion on Israel's participation and for a change to the voting system, which it considered susceptible to manipulation.

Instead of an investigation, Eurovision hired a consultant, Czech broadcasting veteran Petr Dvorak, to interview members about Israel's participation.

Opinions varied widely. “Sometimes they just felt that Israel as a state sometimes used this event as a kind of promotional tool,” Dvorak recalled in an interview. Others wanted the Eurovision Song Contest to be skipped or postponed until 2026. Some felt that Cannes, the Israeli broadcaster, should not be held accountable for its government’s actions.

Broadcasters later received only a summary of Dvorak's findings, not his report, which reinforced the view among some that the entire process was a waste of time.

By the end of September, five broadcasters — Iceland, Ireland, the Netherlands, Spain, and Slovenia — were openly considering a boycott.

A simmering controversy culminates

A Eurovision meeting in Croatia that month did not alleviate concerns. Instead, Green's team gave two seemingly contradictory presentations, according to two participants.

The first presentation claimed that Israel did not influence the outcome of 2025. No detailed data was provided. The second presentation advised broadcasters on how to use social media to secure more votes.

To some in the room, it seemed as if the organizers were saying that online campaigns could influence the vote, but that the Israeli one did not.

Organizers found themselves caught between opposing factions. Rumors circulated that Norway and Portugal might join the group of five disgruntled countries if Israel remained on the scene. Documents show that Israel's allies, such as Germany and Estonia, were against the ban.

Organizers calculated the financial consequences of both scenarios: losing Israel's critics or losing Israel and its defenders. Neither outcome was good, the documents show. By some estimates, Eurovision could have lost more than $600.000 in entry fees.

Things have gotten so bad that even the head of Austria's public broadcaster raised the possibility of his country withdrawing in support of Israel in an internal conversation, according to a person with direct knowledge of the conversation. That would leave the 2026 competition, planned for Vienna, without a host.

A spokesman for the Austrian broadcaster said it had "always been clear" that Vienna would host the event. The broadcaster's chief has since resigned.

In a letter to members in late September, Eurovision admitted that it had “never faced such a divided situation before” and announced an extraordinary vote on Israel’s participation.

Privately, Eurovision lawyers gave extraordinary advice: the organizers could legally exclude Israel if they wanted to.

Eurovision torn apart

A few weeks later, Eurovision canceled the emergency vote, citing a new ceasefire in Gaza. The issue was postponed until December.

Broadcasters still had questions about human rights and the Israeli marketing campaign. But Eurovision seemed to want the controversy to die down. Its communications team sent an email discouraging broadcasters from speaking to reporters.

The delay gave the Israeli government time to apply diplomatic pressure.

Israeli embassies have contacted broadcasters in at least three countries, according to documents and interviews with people involved in the process. In a fourth country, the Israeli government has contacted the Foreign Ministry to discuss Eurovision.

Finally, in December, after months of discussion and delay, broadcasters gathered in Geneva to consider Israel's participation.

Eurovision has again evaded the question.

The Broadcasting Union organized a vote on limiting each viewer to 10 votes and “discouraging disproportionate promotional campaigns.”

There was a twist: if the members approved the changes, they would agree to keep Israel in the Eurovision Song Contest — without ever explicitly voting on the issue. Some members told Dvorak that they did not want to be held accountable in their own countries for such a vote.

The president of the broadcasting union, Delphin Ernot Kunsi, acknowledged that such a solution “might seem quite bizarre.” But, she explained, not voting was “the most democratic possible solution,” according to the minutes of the meeting.

Frederik Delaplass of Belgian broadcaster VRT was not convinced. The Eurovision Song Contest, he told the meeting, was “hiding behind guidelines” instead of discussing human rights.

In a secret ballot, broadcasters approved the rule changes. Israel will remain in the Eurovision Song Contest without anyone having to vote on the matter.

Five disgruntled broadcasters quickly announced a boycott.

Green said the new rules address "a problem of perception," not real problems.

At this year's Eurovision Song Contest in Vienna, other countries are testing new rules, mobilizing their diasporas to vote.

Another Israeli advertisement is causing controversy again. Israeli representative Noam Betan's team has been running promotions on social media urging people to vote for him 10 times.

Eurovision organizers, seeking to avoid a repeat of last year, formally warned the broadcaster and asked for the posts to be removed. "A direct invitation to vote 10 times for one artist or song is also not in line with our rules, nor with the spirit of the competition," Green said.

He reassured the public that such campaigns could not influence the outcome.