Eurovision 2025: Israel cheats, again?

The 2025 Eurovision Song Contest ended in controversy as Israel clinched second place with an extraordinary televote score, drawing international scrutiny. A combination of geopolitical tensions, unusually high public vote figures, and widespread criticism has led to allegations of coordinated vote manipulation. Truthlytics conducted a detailed investigation, integrating verified media reports and visual analysis of voting patterns.

Visual Forensics: What the Chart Reveals

The circular chart provided, summarizing Eurovision 2025’s final public and jury vote scores for Israel, is striking in its irregularity. Israel amassed 357 total points, with 297 coming from public votes and only 60 from professional juries—a disparity that alone raises red flags.

Key observations from the chart:

• 13 countries awarded Israel the maximum 12 public vote points, a scenario almost unprecedented in recent Eurovision history.
• The cluster of 12-point countries spans diverse regions, including Western Europe (Spain, Belgium), Scandinavia (Norway, Sweden), and even Australia.
• Notably, several countries that typically show strong alignment with jury and public opinion (e.g., Germany, Ireland) gave minimal or zero points from juries but awarded top scores in the public vote.
• Jury votes were overwhelmingly low, with most ranging between 1–7 points, further emphasizing the divergence from public sentiment.

This image supports claims that Israel’s televote performance was artificially amplified, likely through organized voting campaigns. As experts have noted, the Eurovision system allows multiple votes per viewer via apps or text—conditions ripe for exploitation if coordinated efforts are launched.

Evidence of Coordinated Campaigns

According to media investigations:

• Pro-Israel advocacy groups and embassies allegedly mobilized citizens and diaspora communities across Europe, urging them to vote en masse.
• Voting anomalies appeared in countries with no mandatory voter identity verification, such as Spain and Belgium, where Israel received 12 points.
• Conversely, nations with stricter voting controls, including Poland and Armenia, did not award Israel public vote points—adding weight to fraud concerns.

Ignasi Guardans, a former EBU executive, described the trend as a “directed political activation,” reinforcing that the surge was likely strategic rather than spontaneous.

In the 2024 Eurovision Song Contest, Israel also faced a wave of criticism amid accusations of leveraging political networks to influence the televoting outcome. Although it did not finish among the top contenders, Israel’s entry saw a noticeable gap between low jury scores and unexpectedly high public vote tallies from certain countries. Observers pointed to online campaigns, allegedly orchestrated by diplomatic and advocacy groups, that encouraged diaspora communities to vote en masse.

While the EBU acknowledged the discrepancy, it maintained that all votes complied with the contest’s rules. However, the incident foreshadowed the more serious and widespread allegations that would dominate the 2025 contest.

Recent reports have revealed that Israel’s government agency orchestrated a targeted advertising campaign across multiple countries to promote its Eurovision 2025 entry, “New Day Will Rise” by Yuval Raphael. This campaign included TV and YouTube ads encouraging viewers to vote for Israel’s song, with content tailored in various languages to appeal to diverse European audiences. The ads emphasized that viewers could vote up to 20 times, aiming to maximize public support. 

While the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) permits participating broadcasters and associated entities to promote their entries, such promotions must not politicize or exploit the contest. The EBU’s rules emphasize maintaining the non-political nature of the competition and ensuring fair play among participants. 

The scale and nature of Israel’s promotional efforts have sparked debates about the ethical implications of such campaigns. Critics argue that leveraging government resources for extensive advertising may undermine the spirit of fair competition and could set a precedent for future contests. The EBU has acknowledged the situation and is reviewing the campaign’s compliance with contest rules.

As discussions continue, this incident highlights the need for clearer guidelines on promotional activities to preserve the integrity and apolitical stance of the Eurovision Song Contest.

The “Austria deserved it” movement

Social media platforms were inundated with viral videos capturing the emotional reactions of Eurovision viewers across Europe as Austria was declared the winner of the 2025 contest, bearing Israel. In living rooms, bars, and public viewing parties, crowds erupted in jubilant celebration—many shouting, crying, and hugging—expressing what they saw as a moment of poetic justice.

For these fans, Austria’s victory was more than a musical triumph; it symbolized a rebuke of perceived manipulation and political favoritism. Hashtags like #JusticeForEurovision and #AustriaDeservedIt trended widely, as users framed the win as a reclaiming of Eurovision’s credibility in the face of what they viewed as an attempted distortion of democratic expression.

EBU’s Response and International Fallout

Eurovision’s governing body, the EBU, has denied any wrongdoing, citing “the world’s most advanced” televoting infrastructure. Yet national broadcasters like RTVE (Spain) and VRT (Belgium) have publicly questioned the integrity of their own results and demanded independent audits. The Finnish broadcaster Yle called for urgent reforms to televoting procedures.

Meanwhile, political fallout has intensified:

• Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez has called for Israel’s exclusion from cultural forums like Eurovision, echoing the precedent set against Russia in 2022.
• Reports from the contest indicate audience boos were muted with artificial applause during Israel’s performance—fueling accusations of censorship.

The Bigger Picture: Eurovision at a Crossroads

This incident marks a pivotal moment in Eurovision’s history. The contest, traditionally seen as a cultural celebration transcending politics, now faces existential questions about transparency, fairness, and political influence.

The stark contrast between jury and public votes suggests a system vulnerable to manipulation, particularly in geopolitically sensitive climates. Without reform—potentially requiring verified voter identities and vote capping per device—the credibility of future contests remains at risk.

Adding to the growing list of controversies surrounding Eurovision 2025 is the revelation that Moroccanoil—the contest’s primary sponsor—is not Moroccan, as its branding suggests, but an Israeli-founded company. This has raised serious ethical concerns, especially in the context of widespread criticisms over the perceived politicization of the event.

Since Moroccanoil became a headline sponsor, multiple artists critical of Israel’s policies have allegedly been banned or pressured to censor their performances. Audience boos during Israel’s performance were reportedly muted in live broadcasts, replaced by artificial cheers, further fueling accusations of narrative control. Critics argue that these actions, alongside government-backed ad campaigns, represent a systematic effort to shield Israel from public backlash and manipulate public perception through commercial and editorial influence.

Conclusion: Truth Under the Spotlight

The data, visual evidence, and mounting international criticism present a compelling case for deeper investigation. As Truthlytics continues to monitor developments, it is clear Eurovision must confront the uncomfortable intersection of entertainment, identity politics, and digital mobilization.

Israel’s aggressive “win by any means necessary” strategy at Eurovision 2025—including allegations of vote rigging, media manipulation, and exploiting commercial sponsorship—has provoked a significant backlash across Europe. What may have been intended as a show of resilience and national pride has instead deepened public resentment.

Critics contend that Israel’s tactics—ranging from deploying misleading advertising campaigns to leveraging sponsor influence and muting dissent—have not only undermined the contest’s credibility but have also reinforced negative perceptions of Israel among European audiences. Far from bolstering its image, these actions have triggered widespread condemnation, with many seeing them as emblematic of a broader pattern of political coercion and ethical disregard. In trying to force a cultural victory, Israel has risked alienating even neutral observers and further isolating itself from European public opinion.

In a contest meant to unite Europe through music, Eurovision 2025 may instead be remembered for how it fractured trust.