Eurovision 2024 concluded last Saturday with Nemo, the Swiss contestant, taking the top prize with the song The Code. In the days following the final, the event remains visible on television through appearances in various venues, including El Hormiguero. The program featured a recent episode hosted by Pablo Motos, who dedicated the closing minutes to discussing what many viewers considered the most controversial edition of the festival yet. [citation: Eurovision event summary]
Eurovision’s Impact Sparks Debate and Division
Swiss victory was announced with much fanfare as the competition wrapped up, while Spain placed 22nd out of 25 entrants. The host opened the segment by reiterating the outcome and acknowledging the mixed reactions among audiences, who greeted the result with a blend of astonishment and amusement. [citation: live broadcast recap]
The first public commentary came from Reuben Amon, who described himself as a casual admirer of Eurovision. He referenced Nemo’s nonbinary identity in a lighthearted dig, suggesting that geopolitical neutrality might have played a role in the final results. The remark pointed to broader conversations about national identity and representation within the contest, a theme that has recurred in recent years as more artists express diverse gender and cultural identities on stage. [citation: audience reactions]
The discussion recalled past political debates surrounding the event. In one moment, a panel reflected on a controversial historical refrain and its potential impact on how the competition is perceived, noting that some viewers might interpret certain lyrics or gestures as statements related to national or political contexts. The exchange highlighted how Eurovision often becomes a mirror for broader social issues, including how audiences respond to symbolic performances. [citation: editorial discussion]
Pablo Motos, Observer of Eurovision Moments
Commentary from Rosa Belmonte addressed the involvement of a participating nation that sparked debate due to geopolitical sensitivities. She questioned the emphasis on a particular country during the televised vote, labeling the focus as surprising. The discussion continued with Juan del Val offering his perspective, noting that some viewers reacted with visible anger toward the participation of that country, while others at home supported the choice by casting their votes in its favor. The dialogue underscored how audience sentiment can diverge sharply between on-air commentary and home viewing. [citation: TV panel notes]
Del Val also expressed admiration for Nebulossa’s candidacy and the song’s appeal, repeating a sentiment he had voiced before in earlier television appearances. He suggested that the song could remain popular throughout the summer, while adding a political remark about a recent policy topic, followed by a quick critique of a performer who did not meet his expectations on stage. The overall mood of the discussion captured the tension between personal taste and the broader debate surrounding the festival’s selections. [citation: panel opinions]
As the conversation progressed, Motos himself posed a closing question to the table, inviting panelists to share their personal take on the next edition. He floated ideas about making a stronger effort in the future and hinted at the possibility of inviting a new set of talents to explore. The exchange left lingering questions about how the festival might adapt to evolving audience expectations while preserving its competitive spirit. A brief technical hiccup interrupted the discussion, momentarily pausing the dialogue but not damping the overall enthusiasm for the next installment of the Benidorm Festival. [citation: show recap]