Ireland’s public broadcaster RTÉ has confirmed that it will neither send an act nor air the show, arguing that taking part would be incompatible with its responsibilities as a public service broadcaster during an ongoing conflict in which civilians are suffering heavily. They released a statement saying that their participation “remains unconscionable given the appalling loss of lives in Gaza”. Spain’s RTVE, traditionally one of the key funding pillars of Eurovision, has echoed those concerns, stating that it cannot justify participation. At the same time, Israel is allowed to compete under the current circumstances. Dutch broadcaster Avrotros and RTV Slovenia have issued similar statements, formally aligning themselves with the boycott and stressing that their decisions are directed at states and institutions rather than individual performers.

Broadcasters behind the boycott point primarily to the war in Gaza, highlighting high civilian casualties, the humanitarian crisis and repeated calls from rights groups for stronger international pressure on Israel. They argue that sharing a stage with Israel in what is framed as a celebratory entertainment event risks normalising the conflict and undermining their own stance on human rights and international law. Some executives and commentators have also referred to earlier allegations about irregularities or possible unfair influence in Eurovision voting, saying these disputes have made it harder to claim that the contest is fully detached from political agendas.

The boycotts are not a first for the competition. In 1969, the UK, Spain, France and the Netherlands were declared joint winners after all securing 18 points. In response, Finland, Portugal, Norway and Sweden boycotted the contest the following year. The European Broadcasting Union (EBU), which runs Eurovision, introduced a tiebreak rule a year later. Another more politically motivated boycott was in 1975 and 1976, when Greece and Turkey boycotted the event after Turkey invaded Cyprus in 1974.

The EBU has defended the decision to allow Israel to participate, describing the contest as a competition between independent broadcasters rather than between governments. The EBU points to planned voting reforms, including a stronger role for professional juries and stricter general oversight, as evidence that it is addressing concerns about fairness while keeping the event open to all eligible members. Major broadcasters such as the BBC and Austria’s ORF have publicly supported Israel’s continued participation, warning that exclusions based on foreign policy would politicise the event even further and could trigger boycotts in the opposite direction, deepening divisions in the Eurovision community.

Featured image credits: MrSilesian

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by @nomusicforgenocide

The boycott, launched in early 2025, advocates for artists and labels to have their music restricted in Israel as a means of demonstrating solidarity in cultural protest. Rather than having artists music pulled from these platforms entirely, the campaign is set to employ a type of geo-blocking as a means of restricting access by region without leaving it inaccessible elsewhere. Following in the tone of traditional cultural boycotts, this particular movement has to now deal with the mechanics of digital streaming. For Lorde, the announcement builds on her recent political messages made throughout her current Ultrasound World Tour. Whilst performing her hit ‘Team’ (2013), she lit up the stage behind her with the Palestinian flag colours, underlining her participation in the boycott. IDLES, who have long maintained a reputation centred around socially charged lyrics and performances, are one of the more high-profile bands to announce their involvement, while the American trio MUNA and producer TOKiMONSTA has also confirmed their participation in the boycott as well.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by @nomusicforgenocide

The movement has continued to grow rapidly since its initiation. Starting with around 400 artists, the tally has now just surpassed 1,000 participants in recent weeks. These artists encompass musicians from independent collectives to internationally touring acts. Its organisers describe the campaign as an active attempt to highlight the problem of cultural “normalisation” in response to the recent events in Gaza. However, the success of such will rely on the cooperation of mainstream platforms like Spotify, Apple Music, and YouTube, and how they will involve themselves with the geo-blocking requests.

The campaign’s expansion also raises questions about how effective geo-blocking will operate when put into practice. Critics note that streaming access is harder to regulate fully, with many stating whether the impact will effect the everyday listeners rather than affect the political institutions. Supporters counter that the movement is more symbolic than functional, a movement of withdrawal whose main goal is to create a visible disruption in cultural flow.

For now, ‘No Music for Genocide’ looks like it will continue to gather momentum, with the list of signatories growing weekly. The involvement of the headline names such as Lorde, IDLES, and MUNA gives the campaign a higher profile than before, bringing it into the lead of music-industry conversations. Whether it proves a lasting movement or whether it just remains largely symbolic, it marks another moment where the global music community intersects with the political climate, and where artists are testing how far their platforms extend beyond performance.

The backlash stems from the festival’s decision to host unannounced panels featuring former UK Prime Ministers David Cameron and Tony Blair, as well as a session with NATO. Critics have condemned what they call the “unethical, misleading and secretive conference programming of war criminals,” accusing SXSW London of using cultural events to mask or legitimise controversial political agendas.

Running from 2–7^th  June in Shoreditch, SXSW London is inaugural UK edition of the renowned Austin-based festival, which blends music, film, art and innovation. This London edition has focused heavily on design, fashion, and visual arts, alongside music showcases and conversations around technology and creativity. Big names on this year’s line-up include Nile Rodgers and Erykah Badu.

Blair took to the stage on 2 June to discuss the intersection of AI and government, urging the UK to embrace the technology with promises of “AI tutors, AI nurses, AI doctors.” Cameron followed with an appearance on the 3^rd  June about the future of healthcare in the UK. Neither of these appearances were listed publicly ahead of the event, a move that artists and activists have described as deliberately opaque.

In response, a wave of artists began pulling out of scheduled performances. Heartworms, who was due to headline Hoxton Hall on Saturday, cancelled her appearance, telling fans: “I won’t be performing at SXSW London this weekend for what I hope are fairly obvious reasons – I stand with those who have already done the same, and thank you to my team and label for their understanding.”

A post shared by Sam Akpro (@sam.akpro)

Other artists who have withdrawn include LVRA, jasmine.4.t., Sam Akpro and Rat Party. In a statement, Leeds-based group Rat Party criticised the festival’s lack of transparency and accused organisers of co-opting marginalised voices for image-washing purposes: “Not only is this highly deceptive, but indicative of the kinds of people/organisations SXSW are willing to platform. As a collective, we can no longer in good conscience participate in this act of art washing marginalised and PoC artists, and will be boycotting”.

 

 

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by Rat Party (@rat._.party)

LVRA echoed similar sentiments, explicitly accusing the event of “artwashing”/

This isn’t the first time SXSW has faced protest. At the 2024 Texas edition, over 100 artists and speakers dropped out in response to sponsorship deals with the US Army and weapons manufacturer RTX Corporation. Acts including KNEECAP, Rachel Chinouriri, Scowl, Gel and Lambrini Girls all withdrew in protest, prompting the festival to cut ties with those defence partners for the 2025 edition.

SXSW London now finds itself facing comparable criticism, raising renewed questions about the responsibilities of cultural festivals – and who they choose to platform.

You can read out full SXSW London preview here

The incident occurred last week as a couple were trying to see a Peter Kay live show, but were stopped by a member of security who deemed the shirt inappropriate and against policy. The man’s request to turn the shirt inside out was denied, and he was consequently refused entry.

He was denied entry to the O2 for wearing a t-shirt that said "Free Gaza." pic.twitter.com/ZYUInPamD7

— Mukhtar (@I_amMukhtar) August 16, 2024

AEG Europe, the company that owns the O2, told Middle East Monitor that the couple were not allowed in as the shirt fell under the venue’s ‘prohibited items policy,’ stating that: ‘in our reasonable opinion, [they] may cause danger or disruption to any event or to other visitors’.

The O2 Arena is a multi-purpose indoor entertainment venue located in the Greenwich Peninsula area of London, England. It is one of the largest and busiest music arenas in the world, known for hosting a wide range of events, including concerts, sports, comedy shows, and other entertainment spectacles.

It has hosted some of the biggest names in music and entertainment, including Beyoncé, Elton John, The Rolling Stones, Madonna, and many others.

The recent incident has brought bad publicity to the O2, however, as it has led to calls on X for people to boycott the venue.

London's O2 arena last week refused entry to a man for wearing a t-shirt with the words 'Free #Gaza', leading to calls to boycott the venue, which has since apologised https://t.co/n4xgl11z55

— Middle East Monitor (@MiddleEastMnt) August 17, 2024

Boycotting brands or companies associated with Isreal’s war on Gaza is not uncommon, with a survey finding that over one-third of consumers are boycotting brands due to perceived stances on the war, using their purchasing power to express political views. This survey included 15,000 individuals from the UAE, Saudi Arabia, the UK, US and India.

Many prominent US-companies, such as Starbucks, Coca-Cola, and McDonald’s, are facing significant challenges due to boycotts, despite many of them asserting that they do not support a particular side in the Isreal war on Gaza.

In response to the backlash that the O2 received, they released an official apology, stating that they “sincerely apologise for any offence and upset this incident may have caused.”

As reported in NME, the O2 went on to say: “Safety and security are our paramount priority at all times, and we do everything we can to provide a safe and respectful environment for all our guests. It is for this reason our ‘prohibited items’ policy exists, stipulated in our terms and conditions for all events.”