This weekend, millions of viewers across Europe and beyond will tune in for the 70th edition of glitter, spectacle and high-energy performances that have turned the Eurovision song contest into one of the world’s biggest live televised events.
But behind the pyrotechnics and questionable key changes lies a long history of controversy: from political tensions and voting disputes to questions over fairness, censorship and even the contest’s identity itself.
Eurovision was first held in 1956 and was created to bring a divided post-war Europe together through music.
Today, it attracts more than 160 million viewers annually.
Critics argue that despite its original aim of unity, it has increasingly become a stage where politics, identity and entertainment regularly collide.
Bloc voting
One of the most frequently cited controversies is so-called “bloc voting”, where neighbouring or culturally linked countries are accused of consistently awarding each other points.
Greece and Cyprus are often referenced as a classic example, while Nordic and Balkan nations also tend to exchange strong support.
Although Eurovision organisers claim that the modern voting system (combining public votes and professional juries) reduces bias, sceptics argue that regional alliances still influence outcomes.
Song entries shaped by political tensions
In 2009, Georgia withdrew from the contest after its entry “We Don’t Wanna Put In” was rejected for breaching Eurovision’s strict rule against political messaging.
The song was widely interpreted as a reference to Russian president Vladimir Putin following the Russia–Georgia conflict, highlighting how geopolitical disputes can spill into the competition.
Youtube: “We Don’t Wanna Put In – Eurovision Song Contest 2009”
Hosting decisions under scrutiny
The 2012 contest in Baku was overshadowed by human rights concerns, with activists alleging that residents were forcibly displaced to make way for the construction of the arena.
While the Azerbaijani government denied wrongdoing, the controversy raised wider questions about whether Eurovision should be held in countries with contested rights records.
Identity and representation questions
When Austrian performer Conchita Wurst won in 2014 with “Rise Like A Phoenix”, it was hailed by many as a milestone for LGBTQ+ visibility on a global stage.
However, it also sparked backlash in parts of Europe, where some politicians and commentators criticised the result, arguing Eurovision had become overly political or symbolic rather than purely musical.
Youtube: “Conchita Wurst – Rise Like A Phoenix – Austria – Winners Performance – Eurovision 2014”
The 2022 jury removal
More recently, concerns about voting transparency resurfaced in 2022, when Eurovision organisers removed six national juries after detecting irregular voting patterns during the semi-finals.
Although the issue was addressed before the final results were announced, it fuelled the ongoing debate about whether the contest’s complex voting system can fully guarantee fairness.
Some of Eurovision’s most striking controversies are less well known.
The year of four tied winners
In 1969, the contest ended in an unprecedented four-way tie between the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, France, and Spain, as no tie-break rules existed at the time.
The result was so divisive that several countries boycotted the following year’s competition, forcing organisers to overhaul the scoring system.
Youtube: “Eurovision Milestones: 1969”
Abolishing native languages
Another long-running debate centres on the 1999 abolition of the native-language rule, which required countries to sing in their own languages.
However, English songs seem to perform better with international audiences, and as a result, about 70% of songs are now performed in English or a mix of languages.
This trend peaked in 2016, when only three entries were not in English, leading to concerns that the event’s cultural diversity might be lost.
Technical rule changes
During and after the Covid-19 pandemic, Eurovision allowed prerecorded backing vocals for the first time to reduce production risks.
Some fans argue that these modernised performances and improved consistency are a positive, while others believe they undermine the authenticity of live singing, which is one of the contest’s founding principles.
Taken together, these controversies highlight a competition that is as much about politics, identity and perception as it is about music.
For some viewers, they damage Eurovision’s credibility.
For others, they are exactly what keeps the contest relevant in an increasingly fragmented media landscape.
After all, the contest reflects Europe, and Europe is rarely without disagreement.
As anticipation builds for Saturday’s final under the tagline “United by Music”, this year’s edition will take place in Vienna following Austria’s victory in last year’s contest.
Twenty-five countries will compete for the trophy, with millions expected to vote live across Europe and beyond, while another ongoing controversy about Israel’s participation has led to multiple national broadcasters boycotting the event completely.
Whether this year’s winner is remembered for the music, the staging or the inevitable debates that follow, Eurovision once again looks set to prove that controversy is not separate from the contest, it is part of the show itself.
