As a Eurovision fan, checking out Intervision was a little confusing... so here are some notes in no particular order.
Quite a lot of talking between each song
Holographic big men and women in modern, festival, or cultural garments to represent each country to counter the Eurovision flag parade
Venezuela's entry's hook gave off the vibes of a South American version of "Pokemon: Advanced Battle Theme" (I'm unbeatable)'s hook
The USA is participating?
The USA is represented by a cowgirl??
The USA is no longer participating due to their representative being pressured by the Australian government (they're from there)???
Why did the USA not choose someone from their vast amount of musicians????
There is an ad after the first song
The cultural diversity is insanely good
Colombia's entry is something Eurovision fans think will do well with the Juries but don't, then end up crying... except they actually did well with the Juries in this case, YAY!
The jury scoring system was weird "27, 24, 22, 20, 18, 16, 14–1"
Only jury votes, no televoting
There is a slight bias for Asian countries in this edition
Russia is unranked? Is it because they're hosting?
Would people represent the host country even if they're not being ranked by the juries???
The next host country is not the winning country but randomly decided?
I love Vietnam and Qatar
I am glad Qatar got a high placement
Vietnam was my winner and it won
Putin talks for a really long time
Everyone is on stage in the jury score reading
Only 1 Jury per country?
No Jury show?
The Juries are sat in the same arena?
The Jury score them live on the same day and time?
I like that.
When the first juror's scores were announced, everyone was so confused and congratulated the Chinese representative thinking he won
The Chinese dude also thought he won, luckily his reaction wasn't that big to be too embarrassing
The broadcasting was very low quality, some performances were slightly delayed
SO MUCH BLUE AND PURPLE
The lights were kind of too bright
Kids are allowed on stage apparently
The contestants are seated in the green room to watch and enjoy the vibes like everyone else until they're about to perform? Eurovision take notes!
No winner reprise? Sad.
Every contestant singing 2015 "A Million Voices" for the outro.... no.
We rarely see people rising up into the air in Eurovision, there were a lot here in Intervision
Serbia's entrant's hair... no.
Why is Egypt second to last? They should be last, not Brazil!
Some LED backgrounds were very screensaver
There were a lot of sleeper moments, but it was an enjoyable watch.
Better than American Song Contest?
Optional live instruments? Cool
"Intervision Song Contest" does not roll off the tongue good
Barely any English commentation, so I was very confused when there were yapping
Only found the Indian host memorable
Once more, TOO MUCH BLUE AND PURPLE
It felt like 2021 again if Switzerland was hosting
Kenya's entry gave out the vibes of a song that would be very popular in the islands of the Pacific Ocean
On September 20th, Russia held their Intervision Song Contest for the first time in almost two decades. The hosting and revival of the show has been seen as a direct response to the nation being expelled from Eurovision.
Russian Foreign minister Sergei Lavrov said that the contest served to "[preserve] traditions and national cultures, as well as religious, spiritual and moral constructs."
23 nations took part, and the winner was decided by a jury, and awarded a cash prize of about £26,661.
The participating nations were:
Belarus, Brazil, China, Colombia, Cuba, Egypt, Ethiopia, India, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kyrgyzstan, Madagascar, Qatar, Republic of South Africa, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Tajikistan, United Arab Emirates, Uzbekistan, Venezuela, and Vietnam
The USA was originally set to take part, but the contestants pulled out. The contest organizers claimed that VASSY, an Australian-American, was forced to withdraw due to "unprecedented political pressure from the Australian government." Additionally, before VASSY, Brandon Howard was set to represent the USA, but he had to withdraw due to unforseen circumstances. The USA still took part as a jury.
The contest was won by Vietnam's Duc Phuc, a gay man, notable due to Russia's extreme laws against homosexuality. The winner also made remarks about Eurovision saying that it was once won by a "bearded man in a dress."
Representatives from Ukraine's foreign ministry said that the Intervision Song Contest was "an instrument of hostile propaganda and a means of whitewashing the aggressive policy of the Russian Federation”.
Serbia is the only nation to take part in both Eurovision and Intervision in 2025.
[Sources]
Participants, Intervision.world.
"Gay singer Duc Phuc crowned winner of Russia’s Eurovision rival, the Intervision Song Contest," attitude.co.uk.
"Vietnamese singer Duc Phuc wins Intervision song contest, a Russian answer to Eurovision," apnews.com.
Participants of Basel 2025, Eurovision.tv.
"Vassy, representing United States, disqualified from Intervision song contest — organizers," tass.com.
"Instead of an American, an Australian woman: the USA changed the participant of the Intervision contest," eadaily.com.
It was so much fun, all those different cultures were so beautiful.
Don't get me wrong, eurovision is fun too, but it was so beautiful seeing cultures from so different continents. A song contest where it's not exclusively bound to one region/continent, but where so many gorgeous cultures were shared<3
Also LET'S GO VIETNAM!❤️
He so deserved it, I was rooting for him during the voting<33333
On one hand, the new Intervision Song Contest is not a replacement of Eurovision for me. I'd prefer the originals as they were a true rep of peace after a Great War that got the whole world ruined.
On the other hand... since I'd only seen the second half and actually heard the entire soundtrack during the prime time discussing Đúc Phúc's victory... I can say I love some of the songs)) A bit underwhelming mostly, but since they're starting out, it may be more fun!
Wishing for the audience votes to appear, though. Not cool to see just the officials out there.
I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO TELL ME. I only watched because Mom really wanted to and I did find some of the songs enjoyable, so... I don't know. Sorry for Vassy not coming, would've probably made it fun. Sorry for South Africa having their number botched like hell. Have they had live rehearsals before that? Feeling bad for their main.
And some of the votes just hurt me. Not saying which.
I think, my final verdict will be: I'll watch Eurovision, JESC and Intervision together)) Doing it for the songs only, so it's all fair!
Couldn't find China, beautiful voice, reminds me of Draco's central head for a bit.
Serbia was adorable🤗💞🌹
Why can't I find South Africa? And the many others...
Conceived in 1960s Czechoslovakia, Vladimir Putin ordered the competition’s return and the US has now confirmed its participation – is this
When singer-songwriter B Howard takes to the stage in Moscow this month, he’ll be making history. On 20 September the Los Angeles-born artist will be the first to represent the US at Russia’s revived Intervision Song Contest, a cultural spectacle that manages to be both nostalgic throwback and very modern geopolitical manoeuvre. While Eurovision has famously stretched its geographic boundaries to include Australia, Russia’s alternative contest represents a rather different kind of international outreach.
Russia dusting off the Intervision brand, largely dormant since 1980 apart from a brief reprise in 2008, follows the country’s exclusion from Eurovision since its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. Its expulsion cut off access to a platform that – while often mocked by British audiences – had served as a crucial tool of cultural diplomacy for decades.
Emblazoned on Intervision’s website is the claim that: “The world-famous music event returns to Russia” – but the contest was, in fact, conceived in 1960s Czechoslovakia. What’s more, that original contest served rather different purposes. “The idea of Intervision was certainly not what the Russians are presenting us these days,” explains Dean Vuletic, a historian who has extensively researched the contest.
Rather than being born of exclusion, Vuletic says the first series, running from 1965 to 1968, was explicitly designed to bring east and west together; Czechoslovak Television actually offered to collaborate with Eurovision organisers, though the proposal was rejected. When the contest finally launched, it featured western artists alongside eastern European performers, including Eurovision winners such as Puppet on a String singer Sandie Shaw and Austrian crooner Udo Jürgens appearing as interval acts.
Poland took Intervision’s international ethos even further during the contest’s second iteration from 1977 to 1980, including artists from Japan, the US and Canada in a parallel competition for artists representing record companies. Both versions were fundamentally commercial enterprises, with Czech and Polish organisers using the platform to court western record labels and launch careers like that of Karel Gott, who became Czechoslovakia’s biggest pop star after winning the inaugural Intervision. As Vuletic says: “They wanted to attract the interest of western commercial record companies. It’s not like they were communists who wanted nothing to do with capitalism.”
The Soviets themselves, meanwhile, were not especially invested in these early contests. “Having been to the archives in Moscow, my conclusion is that the Russians themselves weren’t that interested,” notes Vuletic. With their vast domestic market, they simply didn’t need Intervision to access broader audiences.
To understand why Russian president Vladimir Putin is now so engaged with the concept that he brought the contest back to life via a presidential decree in February requires examining how Eurovision itself has changed since the cold war. The European Broadcasting Union’s expansion eastward in the 1990s dramatically altered the contest’s character, bringing in broadcasters from former Soviet republics and communist states who used the platform to assert their European identity.
This shift coincided with Eurovision’s growing association with LGBTQ+ causes, beginning with Iceland’s Páll Óskar – the contest’s first openly gay contestant – in 1997 and followed by Dana International’s 1998 victory and Conchita Wurst’s triumph in 2014. The bearded drag queen’s win particularly rankled Moscow, coming just as Putin’s government was promoting “traditional values” and passing laws restricting LGBTQ+ content. For visual culture and identities scholar Bárbara Barreiro León, Intervision serves as a “cultural counterweight” to Eurovision, and is born of “a desire to challenge western cultural dominance, particularly as Eurovision has come to represent liberal, western values.”
Beyond the contest’s penchant for camp, perhaps even more galling for the Kremlin was Eurovision’s role as a platform for countries once under Soviet rule to showcase their independence and distinct cultures. Ukraine’s multiple victories – including Jamala’s 2016 song about Stalin’s deportation of Crimean Tatars – directly challenged Putin’s narrative that Ukraine lacks legitimate independent culture and history. As expert in post-cold war history Catherine Baker notes, Ukraine’s creativity in Eurovision has made the contest “a platform where hundreds of millions of viewers can see that Putin’s falsehoods about Ukraine aren’t true.”
While Russian officials promise to promote “traditional values” and reject what they term the “perversions” of Eurovision, this sanitised approach may prove counterproductive. “People like to watch Eurovision because of all of that diversity, because of the provocations, because of the politics,” says Stephen Hutchings, who has studied Russian media for several decades.
So, who has signed up for Putin’s alternative vision? Participating countries appear to be primarily those neutral or supportive of Russia’s position on Ukraine, though the exact roster remains fluid. Initial reports suggested 20-21 countries, and the official website at the time of writing lists 17 – still considerably fewer than the 37 who competed in the ESC in Basel this year. These include Belarus, Kazakhstan, Venezuela, Cuba, and Qatar, alongside Serbia, notionally an EU candidate country. The US’s participation, sending an artist perhaps best known as the subject of speculation about being Michael Jackson’s son, is perhaps the most bizarre. Suffice to say, Ukraine will not be taking part. The country’s foreign ministry has condemned the event “as an instrument of hostile propaganda and a means of whitewashing the aggressive policy of the Russian Federation.”
Beyond politics, Intervision faces practical hurdles. Unlike Eurovision, where participants largely share similar time zones (with the notable exception of Australia), Intervision spans multiple continents, making engagement with the live broadcast and voting procedures more challenging. 8pm in Moscow is 1pm in Cuba and Venezuela – not exactly primetime viewing. Many performances will need to be recorded and shown the following day, undermining the communal viewing experience that makes Eurovision compelling. Unlike Eurovision, which developed alongside European integration and shared cultural experiences, Intervision lacks the underlying political and geographic foundation that could spark and sustain long-term viewer engagement.
The eclectic mix of far-flung participating countries, according to Hutchings, reflects Russia’s broader strategic pivot away from the west toward the global south and Brics nations. Like the reorientation of Russian state TV news network RT after western bans, the contest represents an attempt to build alternative cultural infrastructure outside western-dominated spaces. Yet for all the geopolitical posturing, the initiative may function more as domestic theatre than international outreach: Putin’s broader strategy of constructing a patriotic Russian culture, while demonstrating that the country can thrive independently of European institutions.
If that’s the goal, early indicators suggest the audience isn’t exactly enthralled. As Barreiro León points out, the contest’s social media presence remains underwhelming – little over 4,000 Instagram followers at the time of writing (though Instagram is blocked in Russia, forcing users to access it via VPN), about 14,000 on Russian social media site VKontakte, and approximately 45,000 on a Telegram channel. Eurovision, for comparison, boasts 2.2 million Instagram followers. Even Russian audiences may prove skeptical, Vuletic believes, with educated young Russians seeking cutting-edge music unlikely to embrace a contest explicitly promoting conservative values.
Whether this latest attempt to resurrect Intervision will prove more successful than previous efforts remains to be seen. Moscow may frame this as cultural competition, but practical realities suggest the contest faces an uphill battle. Of course, most European audiences won’t be able to judge for themselves – unlike Eurovision’s widespread broadcast across the continent, Intervision won’t be gracing screens in the EU or the UK. As for whether Russia’s alternative will strike the right note with global audiences – the jury’s out.
