Belarus was given boot from Eurovision over ‘no dissent’ songs
Daniel Boffey in Brussels, The Guardian
4 May 2021, 12:31
Belarus had to be banned from this year’s Eurovision after it repeatedly submitted songs calling for “no dissent” despite the risk of the decision politicising the music competition, the head of the event’s organising body has said.
Noel Curran, director general of the European Broadcasting Union (EBU), the industry body that produces the annual international competition, said a stand needed to be taken with Belarus cracking down on anti-government protests, while also conceding the danger of stoking controversy over future country submissions.
Suspicions have long been aired over the possible political or cultural biases of the voting during the annual TV competition, even to the extent that academics have published papers seeking insight from the judges’ rankings, but the event has a strict policy of avoiding being “instrumentalised”.
Belarus’s president, Alexander Lukashenko, whose regime has been sanctioned by the EU and the US over repression and violence against protesters who claim last August’s election was rigged to extend his 27-year rule, had nevertheless described the EBU’s decision to ban the country last month as “politicised”.
Curran said that the EBU had been clear on what it needed to do after taking advice from country experts over the lyrics of the songs proposed by the Belarusian public service broadcaster, BTRC.
A first song submitted by BTRC, I Will Teach You, was found to have included “subliminal political undertones and meanings”, including the line “I will teach you to toe the line”.
The lyrics of a second replacement song, due to be performed by the band Galasy ZMesta, known for mocking the anti-government protesters, was also deemed to be overly political.
“We consulted externally as well as having our own concerns and decided to ban them or prohibit them taking part this year,” Curran said. “It’s tricky, you know, monitoring songs for political messages, for political messaging is tricky. This one we felt was quite clear, and particularly given what’s happening in Belarus, against the background of what has happened since the elections last year.
“But it’s not an area to jump into because once you set precedents around this, you know you could have everyone complaining about everybody else next year.”
It is not the first time Eurovision has intervened in songs. Armenia changed the title of Don’t Deny in 2015 to Face the Shadow after neighbouring countries Azerbaijan and Turkey claimed the lyrics were about their denial of the Armenian genocide.
Georgia was asked to change the lyrics to We Don’t Wanna Put In in 2009 due to the suspicion that “put in” was a reference to the Russian leader, Vladimir Putin, but the country’s public service broadcaster refused and withdrew.
More than 182 million people watched Eurovision in 2019. About 300,000 people will attend this year’s Eurovision dress rehearsals and competitive performances in person, including the final in Rotterdam on 22 May, after the Dutch government said it would use the programme to test out the reopening of large events.
Curran said the EBU’s stance on Belarus was true to its goal of ensuring that public service broadcasting is impartial. He said it was a mission statement over which the organisation has been increasingly muscular in recent years.
In the most recent example, the EBU wrote a letter earlier this month expressing concern over new appointments to the governing body of the respected Czech public service broadcaster, Czech TV, which are due to be voted on imminently.
Czech MPs are set to pick four new members of the governing body, which has the power to fire its director general, from a shortlist that it has been claimed is dominated by candidates whose views align the country’s prime minister, Andrej Babiš.
Curran said: “The trust levels for Czech TV during the Covid outbreak last year were huge and, suddenly, we have what seems to be a complete politicisation of the council. And so we took a public stand on it.”
He said there were concerns that some governments had become overly comfortable with public service broadcasters acting as a vehicle for issuing Covid health messages, and that there had been a backlash in some quarters when those same media outlets later aired criticism of the performance of ministers and administrations.
4 May 2021, 12:31
The band Galasy ZMesta performed Belarus’s second Eurovision entry, which was deemed to be overly political. Photograph: BelTA/Reuters
Noel Curran, director general of the European Broadcasting Union (EBU), the industry body that produces the annual international competition, said a stand needed to be taken with Belarus cracking down on anti-government protests, while also conceding the danger of stoking controversy over future country submissions.
Suspicions have long been aired over the possible political or cultural biases of the voting during the annual TV competition, even to the extent that academics have published papers seeking insight from the judges’ rankings, but the event has a strict policy of avoiding being “instrumentalised”.
Belarus’s president, Alexander Lukashenko, whose regime has been sanctioned by the EU and the US over repression and violence against protesters who claim last August’s election was rigged to extend his 27-year rule, had nevertheless described the EBU’s decision to ban the country last month as “politicised”.
Curran said that the EBU had been clear on what it needed to do after taking advice from country experts over the lyrics of the songs proposed by the Belarusian public service broadcaster, BTRC.
A first song submitted by BTRC, I Will Teach You, was found to have included “subliminal political undertones and meanings”, including the line “I will teach you to toe the line”.
The lyrics of a second replacement song, due to be performed by the band Galasy ZMesta, known for mocking the anti-government protesters, was also deemed to be overly political.
“We consulted externally as well as having our own concerns and decided to ban them or prohibit them taking part this year,” Curran said. “It’s tricky, you know, monitoring songs for political messages, for political messaging is tricky. This one we felt was quite clear, and particularly given what’s happening in Belarus, against the background of what has happened since the elections last year.
“But it’s not an area to jump into because once you set precedents around this, you know you could have everyone complaining about everybody else next year.”
It is not the first time Eurovision has intervened in songs. Armenia changed the title of Don’t Deny in 2015 to Face the Shadow after neighbouring countries Azerbaijan and Turkey claimed the lyrics were about their denial of the Armenian genocide.
Georgia was asked to change the lyrics to We Don’t Wanna Put In in 2009 due to the suspicion that “put in” was a reference to the Russian leader, Vladimir Putin, but the country’s public service broadcaster refused and withdrew.
More than 182 million people watched Eurovision in 2019. About 300,000 people will attend this year’s Eurovision dress rehearsals and competitive performances in person, including the final in Rotterdam on 22 May, after the Dutch government said it would use the programme to test out the reopening of large events.
Curran said the EBU’s stance on Belarus was true to its goal of ensuring that public service broadcasting is impartial. He said it was a mission statement over which the organisation has been increasingly muscular in recent years.
In the most recent example, the EBU wrote a letter earlier this month expressing concern over new appointments to the governing body of the respected Czech public service broadcaster, Czech TV, which are due to be voted on imminently.
Czech MPs are set to pick four new members of the governing body, which has the power to fire its director general, from a shortlist that it has been claimed is dominated by candidates whose views align the country’s prime minister, Andrej Babiš.
Curran said: “The trust levels for Czech TV during the Covid outbreak last year were huge and, suddenly, we have what seems to be a complete politicisation of the council. And so we took a public stand on it.”
He said there were concerns that some governments had become overly comfortable with public service broadcasters acting as a vehicle for issuing Covid health messages, and that there had been a backlash in some quarters when those same media outlets later aired criticism of the performance of ministers and administrations.
