The decision by RTÉ not to participate in or broadcast the Eurovision Song Contest over Israel’s attendance has made it “much easier for everyone to ignore it”, according to one of the first people in Ireland to publicly boycott the competition.
However, a critic of the boycott has questioned whether it reflected “broad editorial principle” or pressure from a “relatively small but highly vocal activist constituency”.
“This is the third year we haven’t screened it,” said Rory O’Neill, the owner of PantiBar on Dublin’s Capel Street.
Other venues that used to routinely screen the contest, including the George, which celebrates its 40th birthday this weekend, have also pulled the plug.
READ MORE
O’Neill, who performs under the stage name Panti Bliss, said the first year “it was a big decision because as everybody knows, the gays love a little bit of Eurovision and we always used to make a big deal of the night. We’d fully decorate the place and have special guests. It was one of the busiest and most popular fun nights of the whole year after Pride and St Patrick’s Day.”
The business owner and performer said that in good conscience he could not allow his bar to take part, given the scale of civilian deaths in Gaza at the time, and while some of his customers grumbled about the call, most people understood the reason.
“Last year everyone was fully on board, and this year we’re not getting any complaining as I think people understand, and it has become so much easier for everyone to ignore it this year because of RTÉ not taking part.”
O’Neill said PantiBar’s decision to stop screening the contest was validated by what he described as a “deliberate and obvious” attempt by Israel to “use the song contest as a propaganda tool”.
He said the public vote had been manipulated last year to create the impression more people across Europe supported the country – a widespread belief that forced Eurovision organisers to change the rules to give less weight to phone-in votes.
“They want that to be the narrative: ‘Look how well Israel does every year, people love Israel,’” O’Neill said.
The chairman of the Irish Jewish Council, Maurice Cohen, had a different perspective. He said it was legitimate to ask if RTÉ’s position was down to “broad editorial principle, or does it reflect pressure from a relatively small but highly vocal activist constituency, both internally and externally?”
He said what concerned “many in the Jewish community is not any single incident in isolation, but the cumulative effect of repeatedly singling out Israel across cultural, political and public discourse”.
“Whatever one’s views on the current conflict, when Israel alone is subjected to exceptional treatment, many Jews understandably experience that not as neutral policy criticism, but as part of a broader atmosphere of hostility and demonisation.”
He noted history had made “Jewish communities especially alert to moments when political rhetoric moves beyond criticism of a government into a climate of sustained moral vilification.
“No historical comparison is ever exact, but Europe has seen, on many occasions, where relentless demonisation, exclusion, and the normalisation of hostility toward Jews can lead. That history inevitably informs present anxieties.”
He said he was “not persuaded that symbolic gestures such as this improve the lives of Israelis, Palestinians, or anyone affected by this tragic conflict. They may generate headlines or satisfy activist demands, but they do not bring peace closer”.
He suggested Ireland has, “at its best, a reputation for diplomacy, conflict resolution, and moral persuasion. If Ireland wishes to play any constructive role in encouraging peace, dialogue, or mediation in the region, it must be seen as an honest and credible interlocutor rather than having predetermined allegiances. Actions of this kind risk undermining that perception.”
Cohen said in “an ideal world, cultural events should be spaces that bring people together rather than become further battlegrounds for political confrontation.
“Eurovision has certainly long had political undercurrents, but actively deepening that politicisation seems unlikely to serve anyone well.”
