The viral moment around the SloMo melody and a flood of Chanel photos lit up social media among Spanish audiences on Saturday, turning the scene into wallpaper for many. Messages like “Chanelazo has come,” “Bravo Chanel,” and “moral winner” circulated widely as a tribute to Chanel Terrero for finishing third in the Eurovision final with 459 points, just seven points behind British TikTok star Sam Ryder and well ahead of the eventual winner Ukraine with 631 points. The reactions reflected a surge of national pride and a mix of feelings about how the competition turned out.
Four months earlier, the landscape around Chanel Terrero looked very different. The Spanish-Cuban victory at the Benidorm Festival ignited a fierce ethical-political debate, culminating in a parliamentary inquiry where the accuracy of the result was questioned. Thousands of fans backed other contestants, notably the Galician group Tanxugueiras, who had captured the popular vote. Some labeled the victory foolish, and Chanel faced hateful messages and even direct threats directed at the artist [citation: RTVE].
Isn’t it the same artist with the same song and nearly the same stage? What changed?
The narrative shifted dramatically last night. Many critics who opposed Chanel earlier kept quiet, while others joined the wave of celebration. Since the competition began four months prior, the event drew praise and countless heart-shaped likes. The question remained: could the same artist deliver a different song and different stage dynamics? Where did the change come from?
Millions of Spaniards who watched Eurovision on Saturday night witnessed a technically flawless performance by Chanel and her team. The production maintained a steady on-stage lineup that included Exo Narco, Josh Huerta, Pol Soto, Raquel Caurin, and Maria Perez, with stage elements that echoed the Benidorm Fest presentation but introduced fresh choreography, vocal nuance, and interpretive depth that resonated with a European audience. Spanish clichés tied to bullfighting, flamenco, and devoted fans helped personalize the act and sharpen its appeal. The memory of past triumphs, like Maria Isabel in 2004 with a flamenco-infused act, provided historical context and underscored how regional culture can connect with international audiences [citation: RTVE].
The night carried an additional layer: the war in Ukraine. The military conflict shaped public sentiment and voting patterns, with strong support from the public jury and from Ukrainian viewers who had to flee their homes. Ukraine’s victory gained momentum through solidarity votes and the empathy of audiences who kept the Ukrainian situation in the spotlight during the voting process [citation: RTVE].
Reflecting on Eurovision history, the 1993 competition offers a useful benchmark when war in the Balkans disrupted Europe and Bosnia and Herzegovina made its debut. That era relied on professional juries to decide the outcome, a stark contrast to today’s mixed system that blends public and jury input. The current context and the ongoing conflict underscore how geopolitical realities shape festival results and national narratives [citation: RTVE].
With Ukraine possibly unable to host the next edition, the hosting question resurfaced. Maria Eizaguirre, RTVE’s Director of Communications, expressed eagerness to host again. The idea of Spain hosting 54 years after Madrid’s triumph with Massiel captured the imagination, even as President Zelensky of Ukraine voiced a wish for Mariupol to host Eurovision 2023 as a symbol of peace. In Washington, Ottawa, and other capitals, observers noted how a hosting city can symbolize resilience during difficult times, making Eurovision more than just a contest but a platform for unity and cultural exchange [citation: RTVE].