The EBU handled it horribly. Not only they overreacted, they did nothing to avoid slanderous rumours going around, and then they banned EU, Netherlands and NB flags claiming that "only flags from participating countries and pride are allowed". They got in trouble with the European Commission for that, by the way.
That is a weird thing to say from them if you make the statement "only flags from participating countries" then the pride flag should be banned as well. But if your name is literally the "Eurovision" for the countries of Europe and Australia ... and for some reason Israel (money, money, money) then you would expect to be able to have the EU flag there. Here is to hoping they will reorganise their sh.t there.
oh I don't know using a flag that mean the destruction of one country does not seem "overreacted" to me. if you actually care for your country I don't think you want to see it in a event that mostly about music.
@@mayaha200 i do care for my country. Also what do you mean? Non binary flag doesnt represent that. Im sorry if its not what you meant but goddam I needed to read your comment like 7 times cuz I just genuinly do not understand it
@@typiaraLPStv Because as much as they now try to act like all pride flags were allowed and the nonbinary flag being banned was "a mistake", the official list of allowed flags (and the visual reference list the staff at the arena had) only states "only the flags of the participating countries and THE pride flag" were allowed (emphasis mine). Likewise, the visual reference list only had the country flags + 2 pictures of variations of the rainbow flag.
I am dutch and a big fan of Eurovision, but until some big changes are made to Eurovision and its rules, including rules to protect artists, I think we should not participate. I felt like we as a country were thrown into the bin and not looked back on. There was not even a mention of us in the grand final. And Joost is nowhere to be seen in any social media posts as if he never participated. It is really a disgrace. If Joost is declared innocent the EBU has the obligation to make some big appologies because they probably prevented him/us from getting a top 5 result.
No the EBU has no reason to apologise. If there is even just a credible likelyhood of someone commiting assault, that person should be disqualified. Regardless of if they actually broke the law or not, until it is proven that they didn't, they still pose a threat to the safety of the crew and therefore shouldn't be in a situation where they could cause further harm.
@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710 There was no credible likelihood of him committing assault, nor him making any sort of sexual advance, if you have heard otherwise you can thank the initial EBU announcement which seemed to be vague in a way that felt like they were trying to light a fire under the rumor mill so that people wouldn't question their decision and couldn't examine its merit. The decision to reveal no details other than that it was an incident with a crew person of the opposite gender that they felt was a stronger violation of the rules than any qualified finalist had ever committed before in the history of the show (since as far as I am aware they have never done this to anyone else) is one that no professional pr team is doing by accident, the resulting outrage about Joost being a woman beater or sexual deviant was certainly intentional. If there was a legitimate reason to believe he was a threat to crew members they should actually state their case for that rather than intentionally trying to ruin his reputation in the hopes no one will take the time to ask if he actually did something wrong.
@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710you are WRONG. Btw even on the work floor it’s never a hint of … a court determines it. You can’t fire people like that as it will cost you a lot of money if you are wrong, that’s how the law works. Bedside this woman shouldn’t have been there. It was a private area when you got off the podium and they had agreed ONLY his team would be there… there were NO cameras. Hence why she used her phone/ handicap. The point is isreal broke the rules MANY times. They harassed other delegations, 13 counties filed complaints about it, TV commentor twice during the performance on Israeli TV said derogatory things, which is against the rules, so if you are taking rules. They should have been disqualified the second time they broke rules. EBU failed to give the contestant a safe work environment, they didn’t even have their own room, place, as those were all given to the EBU, isreal and TV. Crew, all they had were curtains. The Netherlands doesn’t only just pay € their technique and lighting is superb and they are always asked to help other countries.
@@helenaterschegget8791 This isn't a job. The EBU don't need to follow regular employment law. 🤦♀️ It was not a private area, they just claim that they had agreed that she should not film Joost. Joost's lawyer also says that it was a camera not a phone. You also can't really disqualify the Israeli contestant for actions that the Israeli contestant didn't do. She was never the one 'harassing' people, neither was most of her delegation. From what I can tell, it was mostly other Israeli journalists, and when a delegation member did do something, they were kicked out of the arena. Also where are you getting 13 from? I can only find a couple who reported anything during the show. Also don't lie. Joost Klein's team were given their own room.
If he's found innocent, he should be brought back to compete with an immediate buy to the grand final or at least the Netherlands should because I would understand why Joost Klein would want nothing to do with Eurovision after this.
I saw an interview with the policewoman whom interrogating him said with a little smile that it was a minor thing. Also I know AvroTros is very firm as for zero tolerance policy. (They broadcast the Eurovision 2021) If Joost would have been aggressive or showed unacceptable behaviour, AvroTros would have been the first to acknowledge this and they would never covered his back! But, let’s say he did worse than push/slammed the phone away and EBU holds on to zero tolerance. Why didn’t they stick to those rules with the bulling and harassment by the Israeli delegation? And all the inconsequent/crazy rules EBU made for flanges, the word ‘peace’ etc? I really think it’s much bigger than Joost. I think the real problem is the Israeli sponsorship and the power they are holding over EBU. I really hope the truth will prevail and Joost will be rehabilitated. (When proven innocent)
"Why didn’t they stick to those rules with the bulling and harassment by the Israeli delegation? " How typical is (for hundreds of years...) to scapegoat the Jews for your own faliure - the Israeli delegation has not bullied or harassed anyone - it was actually the victim of the worst bullying and harassment in the history of the Eurovision.
Oh boy, I can't wait for the day when the EBU have to eat their words. I'm also hoping that Avrotros and/or Joost sues them for defamation considering how they did their utter best to make the situation look much more horrifying than what actually happened and they were fine with Joost's reputation being destroyed at a moment's notice.
The EBU cannot afford losing the Netherlands - one of the most decorated nations in Eurovision (who were winners as recently as 2019). And this will cause a dozen of nations like Czechia, Moldova and even Latvia (the government there is also considering withdrawal) could be gone due to the financial burden and the EBU can for sure forget about Bulgaria, Romania, Montenegro, Hungary or Slovakia ever return due to combination of financial reasons and IMO everything that has happened in this year alone. They'd be like 'Do we even want to be in this?'. There are reports that Bosnia & Herzegovina is considering a return in 2025, but considering that they are still not allowed to re-enter due to unpaid debts (and most likely their situation is yet to improve), they might push the return back for 2026. As for Joost - is he guilty 100%. I think not (if he was, I agree - he should be held accountable). He may've acted irrationally (i.e. shoving the camera aside and make a threatening move), but to be quite blunt his wish to not be filmed (which was agreed upon by the EBU, AVROTROS and SVT) was certainly not respected. Which means that IMO neither side is completely innocent and most likely an out of court settlement will be reached by all involved parties - Joost, the female worker, AVROTROS, SVT and the EBU.
If the EBU doesn't do anything to fix any of the controversy causing problems of the Eurovision Song Contest, I have a feeling that it might cease to exist sooner than later. And what an unpleasant closing chapter as well.
@@harrietamidala1691 It would be nice to see some of them win for the first time, but then they would have to deal with the expensive task of hosting. And while some countries like Croatia certainly can, others like... idk, San Marino, are way too small to host, and some like Moldova basically don't have a high enough budget.
Except the two biggest problems aren't ones that the EBU can fix. 1. Joost's Disqualifiction was fair as there is sufficient evidence of him comitting the crime. 2. The EBU cannot unilaterally suspend/exclude Israel without just causing even more controversy. It needs the backing of the vast majority of its members, which it just doesn't have for this issue.
@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710 The EBU needs to make a decision. Does it only want to have European Broadcasters that meet certain Human Rights Requirements or does it want to have all European Broadcasters in general? Regardless if the EBU does want to ban Israel alongside Russia & Belarus, then for the sake of fairness they should do the same to Azerbaijan & Kazakhstan at the very least.
I a mostly disgusted by the disrespect EBU has shown artists and countries > The fact that they were so vague but specified that it was a female worker, letting it lead to gossips that could potentially ruin carreers and no peep from the EBU to stop any of that? > the fact that they disqualified the whole country instead of just letting joost not perform and having a video of the semifinal play (in case there is an actual good reason for him not performing) why let the whole netherlands be punished for his mistake? > the fact that there have been other incidents regarding other delegations that were not met with the zero tolerance policy? Even if there are grounds for a dq, they handled the whole situation in such a disrespectful way, I am greatly disappointed.
It is very clear Joost didn't hurt anyone. The police immediately stated nothing physical had occured. The person that was filming Joost broke the no filming agreement in that area several times. She was asked several times to stop filming by him and others in that area before but she just didn't listen and showed up again. The EBU should have taken steps against her after she broke the no filming rules the first time but they didn't do anything. The EBU didn't protect the artists already little privacy that they had at all. So if Joost pressed down the camera with his hand it was just a frustrating gesture to stop her from filming him while he was in a vulnerable state. She just dropped the camera after that.
"I know what happened cuz I'm a RUclips commenter. " Meanwhile in reality - violence is not necessary for assault, Def not necessary for INVESTIGATING an assault. (Something you should be disqualified for btw, any part of that) A person harassing you or even breaking a holy unbreakable contract, is not a freebie to be aggressive with them. And then you make a Sherlock Holmes like conclusion that he did nothing wrong. Alternatively let's leave it to the prosecution? If there's nothing there THEY will tell you, unless you think there's a conspiracy against the Netherlands for some reason.
@@kalinsimovski5081i am not fully aggreeing on the grounds for disqualification. As far as I know “innocent until proven guilty” is still the law in EU
@@kalinsimovski5081 I cannot add urls because youtube thinks it is spam but from the beginning the police said that there was no physical confrontation. And yes, we know that there was an arrangement that Joost should not be filmed right after the performance. That agreement was broken. Safe working environment is for all people involved, also the artists.
@kalinsimovski5081 if it was violence in Sweden joost would not be able to leave the Country.. If it was a major threat, like 'I'll smash your face if you don't stop filming' he'd be in jail in Sweden. Cause that would be an immediate threat. Even an over aggressive move would resolve to instant punishment. What we have is the Swedish head of investigation saying. He will make a decision to prosecute or not when he reviews the Dutch interviews which are happening now and the coming 2 months. It really can't be more than a frustrated reaction with an unfortunate result. This could and should have been resolved between the people involved. What Joost wanted to do directly after it happened as he felt instantly bad.
It matters! Women are weaker than men, so for a woman is more terrifying being threatened or attacked by a man than the other way around. If the photographer had been a 2 meter high and musculus man, he probably wouldn't have felt threatened by Joost. The law always protects the weaker part.
@@tatjanarad. I think this is really troubling…. You think men can’t feel threatened, or feel scared for their safety? I’ve been a victim of male violence - a lot of men have been victims of violence. Is our experience less significant?
Based on the facts, if he is guilty, then so be it. But I think the female camera person should be punished equally. There was an agreement that he wouldn't be filmed coming off the stage. She broke that agreement. And if he is going to be punished for his actions. So should she be punished. I can understand why she hasn't come out. The internet would eat her alive. And I am not for striking people doing their job, but if what I read was true, he swatted the camera away. She put herself in a situation where she "feels" threatened. If she feels threatened, it's her own bloody fault. If you were to flip the genders here, the male camera person would be getting fired, condemned online and have their life threatened and maybe doxxed, and we would have seen the Netherlands in the Grand Final. The Eurovision Song Contest needs gutted. And the Netherlands should threaten to pull their money if they're not granted an immediate buy into the Final next year for this.
this is what gets me the most. If Joost gets consequences for whatever he did, why does the camera operator not get consequences for being in places where she was instructed not to be? Makes me wonder if perhaps she _wasn't_ instructed. Maybe she was never told of the agreement. Or maybe she was instructed to actively ignore it...
@@JeffFisher-ip9py From what has been stated, he wasn't threatening her, he was swatting a camera away. And this is a miscommunication that could really impact the ESC going forward. If the Netherlands feel the EBU is not taking this seriously and feel mistreated, they're likely going to pull their money. If she knew about the agreement, she's intentionally violated it. If she didn't, then we have to know why. But for it not to be her fault, the EBU had to be running an operation on the level of the Blue Ridge Rock Festival. This is a production that has been going on for decades. I find it hard to believe she didn't know about the agreement. It's a massive production done every year with millions spent to pull it off. Furthermore. We're not talking about legality, here. We're talking about punishment by an employer. But if we're going to get into that, that agreement means her filming is harassment and she violated his right of privacy.
I don’t understand why the investigation is still ongoing. This seems to be an easy case to resolve: Joost, the camera person and any witnesses to the incident should already have been interviewed. There should also be video evidence. Since no charges have been filed, my guess is the EBU is going to wait until they finish investigating other claims of harassment during the festival (including the complaint filed by the Netherlands delegation, among others) before issuing a statement.
In real life, investigations and cases take a lot of time between analysis, hearings, bureaucracy... it's not like in Ace Attorney were all cases take up four days at worst, including the preliminary investigation
@@KyrieFortune in real life, this is a case with a specific number of witnesses and little analysis required. It’s not as if DNA analysis is needed, or any blood tests. It’s not a murder case, it’s a review of potential treats, intimidation and/or simple battery. Pretty sure if Sweden intended to prosecute, they would have already started the process. The EBU, no doubt, will drag out any private investigations and eventually issue some bland statement that satisfies no one.
There would have been a court date soon if Joost's team hadn't insisted on more interviews with people that are now back in the Netherlands. Had the prosecutor refused, Joost could have appealed and draged this out for even longer.
the things that bother me the most about this is sure, if you have a zero-tolerance policy then fine, boot him. But the double-standard that multiple complaints were made about the Israeli delegation and press throughout the week rubs salt in the wound. This shows just how quickly the EBU is able to make a decision and shows their bias (most likely due to MorrocanOil) The other thing that bothers me a lot is the repeat specification by the EBU in their statetment that the camerawoman was a woman. Especially right off the bat when we had so little information, this changes the optics on the incident and due to what we know about this incident from Avrotros the gender has NOTHING to do with what happened and repeatedly bringing it up vilifies him and the EBU paints a picture of scary man vs. helpless woman
If word of mouth is true.... then the woman involved was not officially part of the Israeli delegation and there as an employee of EBU (though she is in fact Israeli and had indirectly accused Joost of being an anti-semite who didn't deserve to breathe the same air as her). Everything I'm getting is provocation by this woman who should never have anything to do with EBU or Eurovision again.
and what the "Israeli team" did different from other teams? they didn't do anything against the rules other then their job and unlike others they didn't ask anything political like others team. and the participate cry "omg how dare you ask me questions you bother me" while it's literally their job to ask questions! maybe next time don't come if you can't handle being ask questions. if anything maybe you have a double-standard against a sorting country?
@@mayaha200now what you’re saying is simply not true. There have been videos and reels made public where the Israeli delegation was PUBLICLY harassing other contestants. (Don’t believe me? Just look them up, they’re all over the internet. Unedited and everything) There’s been a NUMBER of complaints from other delegations about them being Harassed and the EBU didn’t step in. We don’t know if this was also due to the Israëli delegation that Joost has been disqualified, the EBU IS using two standards when it’s coming to Israël right now.
I remember being at home getting some food ready when I heard this on the news. I didn’t know who they were at the time until I listened to europapa and now I understand why everyone is saying free joost but this video is amazing and AMTV never fails to keep my attention good job adam!
@@pierluigidipietro8097 honestly I kinda hope Iceland Ireland Netherlands Norway Finland and Spain all pull out. Even though I would be devastated and I love these countries plus I'm Irish and we need that 8th win 😂😅 but yeah this year was so horrible and messy that change needs to happen
But there is an independent investigation into all the claims against the Israelis. Will anything come of it? idk but at least it's an encouraging sign.
@@erinnadia0409 If you want a Eurovision Song Contest that only nations with strong human rights records can compete in. Would you advocate additional nations being banned as well such as Azerbaijan & Kazakhstan?
The issue I have with a zero-tolerance policy is that it is largely untenable, as it can be exploited by bad actors. Imagine that next year, the top 3 most likely to win are Armenia, Belgium and Portugal for example, and a certain staffer doesn't want Belgium to win. What's to stop them from pestering the Belgian delegation in order to provoke a reaction, then level a complaint and get them suspended immediately, as required by this precedent? Joost's disqualification and the way the incident was handled does set an incentive for causing these kinds of issues and raising allegations. Allegations that can spiral out of control and damage artists outside of the Eurovision too. In declaring this 'zero tolerance' policy, the EBU has endangered participating artists.
None of us knows what happened. So we can’t if the disqualification was right or wrong. we just have to see what happens when the legal system is finished with it. Then we hear more what happened
The only right thing to do was, have him perform than wait until the trial verdict. if he is convicted, disqualify him and remove him the way they removed him now. and if he'd won the number 2 will be the winning country. If he's acquitted no harm would have been done. It is that simple and i hate that nobody thought that way. It's still INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY
Definately not. A - Innocent until proven guilty ONLY applies to the legal system 🤦♀️ i.e. the EBU has no requirement to follow that principle B - Harm could absolutely have been done. An allegation of him threatening someone to make them fear for their safety is very serious, and if this could happen once it could happen again. So him being there meant that he posed a risk to the safety of the crew. C - Allowing 2nd place to be the winner if he was convicted is a terrible idea. At the earliest you would be 2 months into ESC 2025 preparations and now you'd have to abandon the plans and start new ones in another country, several months late. If he appeals or something it could take the large part of the year, if not several years to get a conclusive verdict and then you've completely f*ed up 2025's contest.
@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710 well, they completeky ffed up eurovision now anyway. Prove is in the pudding with nemo only 4th most popular artist at the moment. A i get what you're saying about a winner country having to start months later with preperations. But there were still many other ways this could have been handled. It's already proven by both the investigating officer and lawyers that no ohysical hamr was done, and no threat was made. - it's amready been established that joost didn't want to be filmed after coming down from the stage and the EBU agreed to his terms. so what did happen? We will only know when we see the videos, but that moment in time will look worse than it was as those moments captured on camera wil show every frustration he had still being harrassed after settling he wouldn't be. The problem with todays world is that even the smallest of run ins can be called hate crimes. Just asked Scotland where it's been a complete joke and out of control and incredibly expensive as every one of the 1000 'hate' crimes complaints they get every single day because of that new law have to be investigated. Joost also immediatly after he touched the phone of the woman who then dropped it wanted to talk with her and appoligize. he tried this a few times but she refused. this is not a loving enviremont and this is not a world where people think about others. They just want to be victimezed and get props for it. If this happened in 90% of other countries it would have been brushed off, a hug would have been given, if the phone broke, a new phone would have been provided wrapped and deliver with a cake and all would be well. The EBU could have handled this in so many different ways, the Dutch gave them many different options to handle this. The dozen complaints of the other countries about the bad work enviremont casued 'by' the EBU were all brushed off and not addressed, also the one the Dutch made a day before this incident happened. That has to tel you something Thank god there are a lot of investigations going at the moment cause things really have to chance
@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710 but he didn't threaten someone, if he did he wouldn't be allowed to travel freely. The law in Sweden is harsh against these things, he wouldn't be free right now, already proving that whatever happened wasn't as big as the EBU makes it out to be
In my opinion the Netherlands should definitely withdraw, what happened can straight up be considered sabotage since I'm positive that Joost would have won the whole contest. In the case that Avrotros decides to participate again, Joost should be given another chance and be sent again, mostly to piss off the corrupted, double sided and and hypocritical EBU. I'll say it again, a withdrawal is justified and very much needed, also to make the other countries understand that all that went down this year, is mafia activity basically.
I think it was unprecedented for. They made an agreement he wouldn’t be filmed, and he was filmed! It was an emotional moment for him, as this was for his parents that died when he was a child. If he told the to -fuck- off or something along those lines.
Joost and the team knew of his emotional state and proactively put in their agreement for no cameras to help mitigate a situation such as this (as much as we know anyway). Was there more than one person filming Joost or just this one person? I’m confused why she didn’t stop to wonder where all the other cameras were. It will be interesting to see all the details when they come out.
The main problem for smaller nations can be seen on official scorecards where the ratings are based on song, performance and staging because smaller broadcasters have far less to spend on staging. Compare the UK which looked expensive on screen like a music video (and was) with Croatia which looked budget (and was). If Croatia had the UK budget, they may have won.
As a Dutch person myself I would LOVE it if my country withdrew for a couple of years. It’s been unacceptable what has been done and I’d rather see this kind of money be spend on our own artists instead of a dictatorial organization that can disqualify nations as they please WITHOUT giving the broadcaster their money back AND threatening them to broadcast it. I fully stand with AVROTROS on this and think it’s a show of character that they KEEP having Joosts back. I also hope, but that’s not up to me, that other broadcasters follow AVROTROS in this and also withdraw for a couple of years. This year has been a dumpster fire from the get go and now the EBU is reaping the rewards for this mess. 👍 Where’s the popcorn 🍿
You clearly don't know what 'dictatorial' means 😂 "Without giving their money back"??? This isn't Amazon, there is no 30 day return policy. Joost got himself disqualified and if AvroTros didn't want to 'lose' their money, they should have sent someone who could handle their emotions.
@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710 I know exactly what it means and I mean it in every sense of the word. When the EBU takes something like this for granted, which they do, then it is in my believe the RIGHT of a broadcaster to ask for a refund because they’re not allowed to continue with something they bought. I don’t know if you understand this, but it’s NOT the broadcaster that’s paying for this. It’s the people of the nation. (At least in NL it is!) Maybe do a little research before you say something like this to me 👍
@@peasemaker4 You clearly don't because the decision to DQ Joost was unaniomously supported by the executive board which is ELECTED by the EBU's members. AvroTros paid that fee knowing fully that if they were DQed or had to withdraw during the contest they would not get it back. If the people of the Netherlands don't like that, either: A - Don't send a contestant that is going to get themselves disqualified, or B - Don't participate at all.
It might also not be as easy as "person broke filming agreement" - maybe there was a superior who told her to film. She might just be a person trying to keep her job. These are variables we can not know. I just hope there will be a resolution everyone can accept and that there is a way forward. I love Eurovision and I'd hate for this to break this show of European unity. ♥️
I’m so tired of people who think it’s all ok that he should have been removed, do they even understand Joost was still there? And at after parties, in the dressing room. They never send him away as he was a supposed danger. ALL people incl contestant should have a safe work environment. If you start provoking, like isreal does and there are multiple examples of it, they want the other party to react so they can blame them. The law recognizes provocative behavior and as Joosts was just a gesture, and normal if you said no first, when annoyed. There is no reason he would be found guilty. EBU should NOT make those decisions and like on the work floor, this should be done by a neutral party. They did nothing with all the complaints of 13 contestants. Clearly contestants and counties aren’t important. Well if that’s the case, I agree the Netherlands should not spend time and money, into something, they don’t stand behind. And for people who think that’s good. It means other countries need to pay more, and the Netherlands also provided ebu with resources, like their knowledge in lighting, filming etc. If ebu refuses to change and do the blame game… we should make a new version, the EuroVoice. .
@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710 because Avro tros and NPO is wrong right ? They are not friends with Joost. They are the Dutch public broadcasters, funded like any else’s by taxpayers. And they just released a statement they wouldn’t participate, not just next year, but never, if ebu doesn’t change. This is 1:) the way they treat their contestants and their rights and 2) a transparent neutral party that decides regarding disagreements and complaints But you know better right? And yes the Dutch does pay in more then others so if they don’t participate, other countries need to contribute more, plus their knowledge lighting and filming is superb, one only needs to look at 2021 when they hosted it. And yes they freely help other countries with their knowledge. And that is if you ask Dutch people who eventually fund all of this, if they would do it again after next year. And that be a no for the first time a large majority says no.
@@helenaterschegget8791 They could absolutely be wrong. Either because they are lying to save face or because they have been lied to or misled by Joost and his team. Just because they are funded by taxpayers doesn't mean that they will do what is in the best intrest of tax payers.
@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710 they were THERE actually as witnesses, you forget that they are THE DUTCH DELEGATION, the bubble that’s surround any Dutch contestant, before Joost and they would have after. But sure enough 13 countries are lying right. I’m fairly sure many other countries at this time think is it even worth it. The press is wrong. Everybody is wrong because you say so. Avro tros and NPO is a public company, and has no ties nor friends with joost. They broadcast, and support the whatever contestant. This was already going on with s10, who just published a documentary which follows her during HER Eurovision and she says the same, her boundaries were overstepped again and again, she also explained the contracts, which says nothing about you just be filmed. She acknowledges, this time obvious due to other factors it was worse. You would still say it’s a lie even if all those dancers, and other delegation said it in your face, and they did Ebu won’t have any product without countries. These are the type of comments, that the Dutch journey ends, and I can guarantee you that won’t be the only ones either. So good luck
@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710 im sorry, but you are the one in the wrong here. I dont know from witch country you are, but a broadcaster like avotros could never ever be "misled" by joost. I am dutch and trust me, we take 'funded by tax payers' very seriously. I, as a dutch person, was actually suprised that avotros showed that they really stood behind joost. They normally dont do that, especcialy by something as big as eurovision. I think that everything they say in thier statement is true
Eden Golan couldn't leave her hotel room and had to be accompanied by security because of the situation, so excuse me if I don't care about Joost being booted for being an entitled asshole.
Yes, they should have behaved as adults. It was a song contest, not a war. All in all, think they should never allowed Israël in. But heard the are the biggest sponsor?
10:39 That just doesn't seem very likely tho. People love to bring up that the Netherlands is a 'big contributor' but it's still only 4 or 5% of the total participation fees. That averages out to an extra €8 grand for every broadcaster, but in reality this would likely be distributed less evenly. If it was distributed like the current fees are e.g. Moldova would only see a rise in about €1000 which might still be too much for them, but it definately won't be a "mass exodus"
Το τραγούδι αυτό έμελλε να κερδίσει τον διαγωνισμό ... έλα όμως που ο διαγωνισμός αυτός δεν είναι πλέον διαγωνισμός τραγουδιού, αλλά πολιτικής ... χρόνια τώρα ... και στην συγκεκριμένη περίπτωση, φαίνεται πως ο Ολλανδός τραγουδιστής εναντιώθηκε, όπως κι οι περισσότεροι συνάδελφοί του, στην ισραηλινή βαρβαρότητα ... κι αυτό είναι που του στοίχισε τελικά ... για να μην εμπλακούν όμως άμεσα οι ισραηλινοί, κατασκευάστηκε (ή ενδεχομένως αξιοποιήθηκε) ένα δευτερευούσης σημασίας περιστατικό ... και πάρτον κάτω τον επίδοξο νικητή ... όμορφος κόσμος, αγγελικά πλασμένος ... europapa
when it comes to this incident even though it is wrong to try and threaten a person, i feel like there is a bit of a gap between threatening and getting disqualified, the situation was pourly dealt with by the EBU, and i feel that it is fair for Joost and Avrotros to be very angry with the EBU. BTW in your video around 14:15 you say something in the lines of "god forbid that he could have hurt her", it is confirmed by Avrotros that Joost never touched her so no need to even speculate on that.
I hope whatever happened will be made public, because as it stands my impression is that he just (maybe/probably aggressively?) pushed the camera away or something, and if that was the case then everything was an overreaction
There's so much focus on the threats but nothing about the situation that lead to the threats, as far as I'm aware the woman was never reprimanded for her actions in this.
To me the fact that the powers to be prefer to jeopardize the future of the Contest, rather than actually do something to preserve the longevity of it (and come on, we all know exactly what needs to be done, but given the fact the grand sponsor's origin I doubt it) speaks volumes of the leverage certain sponsors and/or states have on the EBU. I mean, this year we've actually verged on blackmailing in order to promote a certain agenda and very quickly the whole occasion which usually is jolly and silly, turned sour. For next year, if nothing changes and many countries will choose to abstain as a result, the Contest won't be even worth watching ironically...
The sponsor might have some minor influence but definately not to the extent that you are talking about. The EBU cannot unilaterally suspend a member unless they have consistently broken EBU rules outside of ESC. The only way the EBU would suspend them is if the vast majority of its members support it, which just isn't the case rn.
I agree with that, but in that case the double standards concerning the Russian suspension is apparent and undeniable. Unfortunately the ESC in nowadays just a platform for specific political agendas. Sure, we had political incidents before, starting actually from my country Greece, which in 1976 sent a song as a protest of the Turkish invasion in Cyprus, allegedly the singer Mariza Koch was wearing a bulletproof vest underneath her dress because there were many threats for her life by Turkish extremists living in The Netherlands where the contest took place then. But those were instigated by the participating countries, now the platform to promote those agendas in centralized and too much in your face in my opinion.
@@PanosDCC The thing is though from the EBU's perspective there is no double standard with Russia. The EBU wasn't going to exclude either of them, until its members disagreed. But whilst in Russia's case the EBU's members did call for Russia's expulsion, the same d idn't happen (at a wide enough scale) for Israel. And whilst you could still call that a double standard, it's a double standard from thr broadcasters not the EBU, and the EBU can't do anything to change that without risking the collapse of the contest.
@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710 The EBU should have been more willing to reject banning Russia & Belarus quite frankly. Mainly because it has set a dangerous precedent that nobody will end up enjoying.
@@MrSmith1984 They were willing to punish Belarus. Belarus was suspended in 2021 long before the war for violating other EBU rules. And had the EBU unilaterally banned Russia that would have set an even more dangerous precedent. The EBU isn't an international court, and therefore it isn't their job to judge countries on their actions but if they had banned Russia they could start banning other countries on more arbitrary things. Them not wanting to ban Russia or Israel, though annoying, at least guarentees that any future decision would have to be reasonable and well supported.
When I saw how politics play a role in music.. I still don't believe anything.. And it makes me angry.. Russia banned, and Isreal in this.. Uniting people.. When its a joke, then quit..
Ok ppl, please tell me what you would have thought if He wasn't DISQ, and that EBU didn't do anything about it, when a possible crime had accrued (it's on film). What would ppl have said then....???
We don't have any concrete evidence or anything. Putting aside the legal principal of innocent before proven guilty, people defending the disqualification cannot possibly keep using the claim that he *could* be prosecuted as definitive evidence that he did wrong. It's been so long now, if there was indeed a credible case, they should've moved forward already.
IF Joost was filmed against his will backstage. Whatever he did, was captured on camera. So at some point we will get to see what happened (or not in case of foul play by eurovision)
Sometimes it's perception rather than reality. What those involved think happened this. You can write or say something innocently and it will be taken in a way that is totally unattended. Especially if mental health is involved. - We don't know these people so we are clueless. The victim could very well be a victim.
It's a tough call as I wasn't there, but I'd like to have seen his song and think they should have played it, that EV didn't need any more controversy than it already had. if all he did was yell at them for doing something they expressly agreed not to do then did anyway, I understand. but until we know more who can say?
I am on the fence regarding the "female staff member" not having made a public statement. Considering how She was the one who broke contract, and then She cried wolf after Joost reacted perhaps aggressively, sure, but I'm also certain that the clause was added to avoid a situation just like this so one could argue this was provocation... Since Joost is already being punished, both of them should be investigated with the woman being terminated from her position - as she is clearly not intelligent enough to respect a contract, and also not empathetic enough to respect a fellow human's request and pain - and be fined at the very least. The EBU is protecting "their staff" but not the performers without whom there would be no Eurovision ?
@@driekeijlders281 A we don't know that. AvroTros have been very vague, just saying that there were "agreements". B That's because unlike AvroTros, SVT respect criminal investigations and therefore won't make comments that could interfere with them.
@@driekeijlders281 no I made the claim that they did not release a statement or any comments about what they believe happened. Now prove me wrong or admit to being wrong.
@@driekeijlders281 😂🤦♀️ They absolutely do not. Every single one says something like "the police said this...", "sources say this...", etc. Thank you for admitting to being wrong.
What to me is such a stain on the image of EBU is that while claiming the harsh reaction came from a noble place of trying to keep everybody safe, this standard did CLEARLY not apply to Joost himself and the fellow contestants' safety and privacy. EBU did NOT take the privacy and safety of artists and personnel seriously enough UNTIL there was a an incident. A certain country had a reporter in the delegation, going totally against the journalistic integrity of any other media personnel strictly prohibited from delegations-only spaces. Videos of artists both contestants and guests were published without the knowledge or permission from them. The amount of clips where artists are followed by media people while clearly expressing disinterest to be filmed is gross. Multiple delegations were at the emergency meeting with EBU representatives for these concerns, going apparently unheard, but a single incident stemming from EBU neglecting to ensure privacy and boundaries for artists in the first place was what lead to this extend of repercussions - not for EBU, but a participant. It's such a platant copout in my opinion, details be damned. I sincerely hope they are currently negotiating Österdahl's step-down. I've been saying it, and will continue to: EBU had it coming and deserves all the struggle they brought onto themselves by pisspoor leadership this year. I wish for no mass exodus, but I hope broadcasters will be using their voices ever more and more emphasis will be put on the collaboration of national broadcasters instead of over the dictatorship of EBU. Avrotros deserves an apology regardless and overall delegation poor sportsmanship as well as outright bad behavior should also be open for repercussions. I care way more about what was going on in the multiple delegatiions and EBU emergency meating and why their concerns were not heard than the outcome of the investigation of a single incident. Keeping up appearances for mere PR with little to no accountability on part of leadership, non-existent communication to the public and seemingly unfair and inequal attention to keeping up rules is no longer enough.
Why would Österdahl step down? The EBU is absolutely not a dictatorship. For example, the decision about Joost was backed by the reference board (with producers and editors from 9 broadcasters) and unanimously supported by the elected executive board (with the heads of 10 broadcasters). Just because they make fair decisions that you don't like doesn't make them a dictatorship.
And how about the woman who didn't work according the arrangement? That was ok? It's action/reaction. If she kept herself to the arrangement, nothing would've happend. AVRO TROS probably already saw the images, and still stand behind him. That says enough.
what happened to him was disgusting he was robbed it should not have happen he was treated unfairly he had told them no photos leave him alone he was upset the song was for his mum and dad but still they bugged him he didn't deserve to be kicked out others have done worse
Eurovision is now in DEEP shit. The EBU handled that horribly. Netherlands is a big contributor to the contest, if they leave, the price of participation for smaller countries will rise and countries won’t be able to pay for it. It’s just gonna create a domino effect. I honestly won’t be surprised if next year or the year after there won’t even be semi-finals 😭😭
I also still don’t understand why Israel can compete I mean they are in war so if they apparently don’t care about war they bring Russia back (I also don’t understand why did Israel make Moroccanoil I mean what)
If AvroTros decide to pull out in the future, it could go to any other member of the EBU in the Netherlands to broadcast it. In the UK, if the BBC pulled out, ITV plc. are also EBU members and would certainly be keen. I expect to see the Netherlands back so long as their viewers want it.
Thats not how public television broadcasting works in The Netherlands. EBU rights are managed bij the governing body of the public broadcasters (NPO) not by AvroTros directly. If AvroTros pulls out; nobody will participate in Eurovision, but the broadcast will still be managed bij de NPO.
@@ar50000It's not. It's just that, unlike what many Dutch people want, Swedish police aren't going to treat someone differently because they're popular.
zero tollerance in 2024 is not what it was 2 years ago. The way the woke world has changed is scary and will only backfire at some point. I come from an era where we're not scared to say what we want, or get angry when someone screws up or something goes wrong. It's the way to get the best product in the end. No BS, just actual results. Now the second the production, whatever it may have been is over, everyone is to their lovely self and we all go out for drinks and fun and love eachother deerly. it's the same thing in restaurants. Chefs are complete aholes to their staf during the 2 hours of service. The second it's over they're the loveliest person in the world. And everyone knows why it's done like that, cause the chef has a product and image to protect. all this tip toeing workspace atmosphere is ruining a lot of businesses. Especially in the creative world where creative people are very protective of their work and want the best result that's in their head, and will become a huge drustrating point if no one else gets it (which is 80% of the time) - These persons have short fuses but they love you with all their being. If you know that, and if you know a person is like that, you can accept the 'bad' moments as well... sorry, rant over lol
This so called female was a tiktok employee, also an advertiser in Eurovision song contest? So also contradictory like Moroccan oil? Could this have influenced the disqualification?
@@JeffFisher-ip9py if I tell a fib, I got this from a source nearby! So if I told a fib with a source! It will al come out eventually! If I was wrong I will say so too! It makes more sense, a tik tok photographer would like to be invasive. As a new contributor to Eurovision?
EBU gives me FIFA vibes. And that is not a good thing. Joost case will be just the first step into a further s@#€€ storm. It has all the hallmarks for it. Making the broadcaster responsible and put ANOTHER punishment on them IS a sure way to NEVER get the country of broadcaster ever wanting to come back. Disqualification is already been a punishment, plus they paid also. It is the exact insane FIFA thinking... we can boss everyone around with no backlash. This all, even if Joost was wrong.
everyone being in uproar that he was RGIHTFULLY disqualified, people in uproar moaning how Israeli women still gets to perform when she literally did nothing wrong
To be honest, I'm not really sure what else Österdahl/the ESC could have done on that day. The only other options I can think of given the circumstances would be to either let Joost Klein compete as if nothing happened, or to postpone the final to a later date when the investigation was done. Allowing Klein to compete regardless would have been controversial in a similar (but not identical) way to how Golan was allowed to compete, and spectators and competitors alike would have been up in arms if they were all told "Sorry, come back later once we've sorted this mess out". I'm not saying that disqualifying Klein was the right decision. Just that, aside from those other two unpopular choices, I literally can't think of anything else they could have done.
It was definately the right decision, even if he is later proven innocent. There was a strong possibility that he committed assault against a member of the production crew, meaning that he was now a risk to the crew.
They could have let him compete in The final, and later when the court'd have given the verdict, then EBU could disqualify him if necessary from the results.
@@annalyon2729 That would have been a really dumb decision. His actions meant that he posed a risk towards the production crew so he should be removed from that situation as soon as possible.
Just WHO ? i didnt notice at all in fact I never even knew you existed.. you are one of those people who think because you on youtube your oppinion matters more than anyone else. I have watched eurovisioon sins I was 5 got really excited when brotherhood of man won ... If the police are involved it is totally appropriate to remove a potential criminal
I think the text was a little bit too heated for the EBU, so they created this incident. He definitely would have had won the Song Contest by public votes.
Joost wouldn't have won regardless. Even if he had gotten a huge televote score (likely by taking a big chunk out of Croatia), the juries wouldn't have given him the support he needed and given him a low score
What I’m most annoyed about is that literally every Eurovision video has comments spammed with: JUSTICE FOR JOOST, HE SHOULD BE IN 2025 etc etc and its SO ANNOYING
The EBU handled it horribly. Not only they overreacted, they did nothing to avoid slanderous rumours going around, and then they banned EU, Netherlands and NB flags claiming that "only flags from participating countries and pride are allowed". They got in trouble with the European Commission for that, by the way.
That is a weird thing to say from them if you make the statement "only flags from participating countries" then the pride flag should be banned as well.
But if your name is literally the "Eurovision" for the countries of Europe and Australia ... and for some reason Israel (money, money, money) then you would expect to be able to have the EU flag there.
Here is to hoping they will reorganise their sh.t there.
"And pride" THEN WHY DID THE EBU NOT ALLOW THE NONBINARY FLAG
oh I don't know using a flag that mean the destruction of one country does not seem "overreacted" to me. if you actually care for your country I don't think you want to see it in a event that mostly about music.
@@mayaha200 i do care for my country. Also what do you mean? Non binary flag doesnt represent that. Im sorry if its not what you meant but goddam I needed to read your comment like 7 times cuz I just genuinly do not understand it
@@typiaraLPStv Because as much as they now try to act like all pride flags were allowed and the nonbinary flag being banned was "a mistake", the official list of allowed flags (and the visual reference list the staff at the arena had) only states "only the flags of the participating countries and THE pride flag" were allowed (emphasis mine). Likewise, the visual reference list only had the country flags + 2 pictures of variations of the rainbow flag.
I am dutch and a big fan of Eurovision, but until some big changes are made to Eurovision and its rules, including rules to protect artists, I think we should not participate.
I felt like we as a country were thrown into the bin and not looked back on. There was not even a mention of us in the grand final. And Joost is nowhere to be seen in any social media posts as if he never participated. It is really a disgrace. If Joost is declared innocent the EBU has the obligation to make some big appologies because they probably prevented him/us from getting a top 5 result.
No the EBU has no reason to apologise. If there is even just a credible likelyhood of someone commiting assault, that person should be disqualified.
Regardless of if they actually broke the law or not, until it is proven that they didn't, they still pose a threat to the safety of the crew and therefore shouldn't be in a situation where they could cause further harm.
@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710 There was no credible likelihood of him committing assault, nor him making any sort of sexual advance, if you have heard otherwise you can thank the initial EBU announcement which seemed to be vague in a way that felt like they were trying to light a fire under the rumor mill so that people wouldn't question their decision and couldn't examine its merit. The decision to reveal no details other than that it was an incident with a crew person of the opposite gender that they felt was a stronger violation of the rules than any qualified finalist had ever committed before in the history of the show (since as far as I am aware they have never done this to anyone else) is one that no professional pr team is doing by accident, the resulting outrage about Joost being a woman beater or sexual deviant was certainly intentional. If there was a legitimate reason to believe he was a threat to crew members they should actually state their case for that rather than intentionally trying to ruin his reputation in the hopes no one will take the time to ask if he actually did something wrong.
@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710you are WRONG. Btw even on the work floor it’s never a hint of … a court determines it. You can’t fire people like that as it will cost you a lot of money if you are wrong, that’s how the law works. Bedside this woman shouldn’t have been there. It was a private area when you got off the podium and they had agreed ONLY his team would be there… there were NO cameras. Hence why she used her phone/ handicap. The point is isreal broke the rules MANY times. They harassed other delegations, 13 counties filed complaints about it, TV commentor twice during the performance on Israeli TV said derogatory things, which is against the rules, so if you are taking rules. They should have been disqualified the second time they broke rules. EBU failed to give the contestant a safe work environment, they didn’t even have their own room, place, as those were all given to the EBU, isreal and TV. Crew, all they had were curtains.
The Netherlands doesn’t only just pay € their technique and lighting is superb and they are always asked to help other countries.
@@helenaterschegget8791 This isn't a job. The EBU don't need to follow regular employment law. 🤦♀️
It was not a private area, they just claim that they had agreed that she should not film Joost. Joost's lawyer also says that it was a camera not a phone.
You also can't really disqualify the Israeli contestant for actions that the Israeli contestant didn't do. She was never the one 'harassing' people, neither was most of her delegation. From what I can tell, it was mostly other Israeli journalists, and when a delegation member did do something, they were kicked out of the arena.
Also where are you getting 13 from? I can only find a couple who reported anything during the show.
Also don't lie. Joost Klein's team were given their own room.
If he's found innocent, he should be brought back to compete with an immediate buy to the grand final or at least the Netherlands should because I would understand why Joost Klein would want nothing to do with Eurovision after this.
I saw an interview with the policewoman whom interrogating him said with a little smile that it was a minor thing. Also I know AvroTros is very firm as for zero tolerance policy. (They broadcast the Eurovision 2021) If Joost would have been aggressive or showed unacceptable behaviour, AvroTros would have been the first to acknowledge this and they would never covered his back! But, let’s say he did worse than push/slammed the phone away and EBU holds on to zero tolerance. Why didn’t they stick to those rules with the bulling and harassment by the Israeli delegation? And all the inconsequent/crazy rules EBU made for flanges, the word ‘peace’ etc? I really think it’s much bigger than Joost. I think the real problem is the Israeli sponsorship and the power they are holding over EBU. I really hope the truth will prevail and Joost will be rehabilitated. (When proven innocent)
100%
Wow, how was she allowed to talk about a case that is still ongoing? Doesn't sound professional.
"Why didn’t they stick to those rules with the bulling and harassment by the Israeli delegation? " How typical is (for hundreds of years...) to scapegoat the Jews for your own faliure - the Israeli delegation has not bullied or harassed anyone - it was actually the victim of the worst bullying and harassment in the history of the Eurovision.
Oh boy, I can't wait for the day when the EBU have to eat their words. I'm also hoping that Avrotros and/or Joost sues them for defamation considering how they did their utter best to make the situation look much more horrifying than what actually happened and they were fine with Joost's reputation being destroyed at a moment's notice.
🐙
Richard Marx is credited as a writer on Joost’s new song.
I think Joost was also inspired by Fairytales - 2 Brothers On the 4th floor, a classic '90s computer animated video clip
Well... because he IS😂😂😂😂
@solwidotnl it's not inspired if it's the same song just sped up😂
Which means, at a minimum, he paid to sample Richard Marx song.
@@TheOmegaRiddler yes?
The EBU cannot afford losing the Netherlands - one of the most decorated nations in Eurovision (who were winners as recently as 2019). And this will cause a dozen of nations like Czechia, Moldova and even Latvia (the government there is also considering withdrawal) could be gone due to the financial burden and the EBU can for sure forget about Bulgaria, Romania, Montenegro, Hungary or Slovakia ever return due to combination of financial reasons and IMO everything that has happened in this year alone. They'd be like 'Do we even want to be in this?'. There are reports that Bosnia & Herzegovina is considering a return in 2025, but considering that they are still not allowed to re-enter due to unpaid debts (and most likely their situation is yet to improve), they might push the return back for 2026.
As for Joost - is he guilty 100%. I think not (if he was, I agree - he should be held accountable). He may've acted irrationally (i.e. shoving the camera aside and make a threatening move), but to be quite blunt his wish to not be filmed (which was agreed upon by the EBU, AVROTROS and SVT) was certainly not respected. Which means that IMO neither side is completely innocent and most likely an out of court settlement will be reached by all involved parties - Joost, the female worker, AVROTROS, SVT and the EBU.
We were also one of the founders of Eurovision and one of the countries that have performed the most since the beginning of the contest
thanks for this comment, I agree with it. Don't have something to add myself, but see this as support for your comment from NL.
If the EBU doesn't do anything to fix any of the controversy causing problems of the Eurovision Song Contest, I have a feeling that it might cease to exist sooner than later. And what an unpleasant closing chapter as well.
Here here 🙌
A world without Eurovision scarcely bears thinking about, especially since we have countries that haven’t had a chance to win yet.
@@harrietamidala1691 It would be nice to see some of them win for the first time, but then they would have to deal with the expensive task of hosting. And while some countries like Croatia certainly can, others like... idk, San Marino, are way too small to host, and some like Moldova basically don't have a high enough budget.
Except the two biggest problems aren't ones that the EBU can fix.
1. Joost's Disqualifiction was fair as there is sufficient evidence of him comitting the crime.
2. The EBU cannot unilaterally suspend/exclude Israel without just causing even more controversy. It needs the backing of the vast majority of its members, which it just doesn't have for this issue.
@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710
The EBU needs to make a decision. Does it only want to have European Broadcasters that meet certain Human Rights Requirements or does it want to have all European Broadcasters in general?
Regardless if the EBU does want to ban Israel alongside Russia & Belarus, then for the sake of fairness they should do the same to Azerbaijan & Kazakhstan at the very least.
I a mostly disgusted by the disrespect EBU has shown artists and countries
> The fact that they were so vague but specified that it was a female worker, letting it lead to gossips that could potentially ruin carreers and no peep from the EBU to stop any of that?
> the fact that they disqualified the whole country instead of just letting joost not perform and having a video of the semifinal play (in case there is an actual good reason for him not performing) why let the whole netherlands be punished for his mistake?
> the fact that there have been other incidents regarding other delegations that were not met with the zero tolerance policy?
Even if there are grounds for a dq, they handled the whole situation in such a disrespectful way, I am greatly disappointed.
It is very clear Joost didn't hurt anyone. The police immediately stated nothing physical had occured. The person that was filming Joost broke the no filming agreement in that area several times. She was asked several times to stop filming by him and others in that area before but she just didn't listen and showed up again. The EBU should have taken steps against her after she broke the no filming rules the first time but they didn't do anything. The EBU didn't protect the artists already little privacy that they had at all. So if Joost pressed down the camera with his hand it was just a frustrating gesture to stop her from filming him while he was in a vulnerable state. She just dropped the camera after that.
"I know what happened cuz I'm a RUclips commenter. "
Meanwhile in reality - violence is not necessary for assault, Def not necessary for INVESTIGATING an assault. (Something you should be disqualified for btw, any part of that)
A person harassing you or even breaking a holy unbreakable contract, is not a freebie to be aggressive with them.
And then you make a Sherlock Holmes like conclusion that he did nothing wrong. Alternatively let's leave it to the prosecution? If there's nothing there THEY will tell you, unless you think there's a conspiracy against the Netherlands for some reason.
You cannot prove almost all of this.
@@kalinsimovski5081i am not fully aggreeing on the grounds for disqualification. As far as I know “innocent until proven guilty” is still the law in EU
@@kalinsimovski5081 I cannot add urls because youtube thinks it is spam but from the beginning the police said that there was no physical confrontation. And yes, we know that there was an arrangement that Joost should not be filmed right after the performance. That agreement was broken. Safe working environment is for all people involved, also the artists.
@kalinsimovski5081 if it was violence in Sweden joost would not be able to leave the Country.. If it was a major threat, like 'I'll smash your face if you don't stop filming' he'd be in jail in Sweden. Cause that would be an immediate threat. Even an over aggressive move would resolve to instant punishment.
What we have is the Swedish head of investigation saying. He will make a decision to prosecute or not when he reviews the Dutch interviews which are happening now and the coming 2 months.
It really can't be more than a frustrated reaction with an unfortunate result. This could and should have been resolved between the people involved. What Joost wanted to do directly after it happened as he felt instantly bad.
Why did they have to mention it was a female employee constantly? It shouldn't matter.
It matters! Women are weaker than men, so for a woman is more terrifying being threatened or attacked by a man than the other way around. If the photographer had been a 2 meter high and musculus man, he probably wouldn't have felt threatened by Joost. The law always protects the weaker part.
that's the part, when women harass men, nothing happen, but when the other way around, yeah
@@tatjanarad wtf? please shut up
Because woke persons get things woke
@@tatjanarad. I think this is really troubling…. You think men can’t feel threatened, or feel scared for their safety? I’ve been a victim of male violence - a lot of men have been victims of violence. Is our experience less significant?
Based on the facts, if he is guilty, then so be it. But I think the female camera person should be punished equally. There was an agreement that he wouldn't be filmed coming off the stage. She broke that agreement. And if he is going to be punished for his actions. So should she be punished. I can understand why she hasn't come out. The internet would eat her alive. And I am not for striking people doing their job, but if what I read was true, he swatted the camera away. She put herself in a situation where she "feels" threatened. If she feels threatened, it's her own bloody fault. If you were to flip the genders here, the male camera person would be getting fired, condemned online and have their life threatened and maybe doxxed, and we would have seen the Netherlands in the Grand Final. The Eurovision Song Contest needs gutted. And the Netherlands should threaten to pull their money if they're not granted an immediate buy into the Final next year for this.
this is what gets me the most. If Joost gets consequences for whatever he did, why does the camera operator not get consequences for being in places where she was instructed not to be?
Makes me wonder if perhaps she _wasn't_ instructed. Maybe she was never told of the agreement. Or maybe she was instructed to actively ignore it...
Punished for what? A miscommunication? That's not illegal, but threatening someone is.
@@JeffFisher-ip9py From what has been stated, he wasn't threatening her, he was swatting a camera away. And this is a miscommunication that could really impact the ESC going forward. If the Netherlands feel the EBU is not taking this seriously and feel mistreated, they're likely going to pull their money.
If she knew about the agreement, she's intentionally violated it. If she didn't, then we have to know why. But for it not to be her fault, the EBU had to be running an operation on the level of the Blue Ridge Rock Festival. This is a production that has been going on for decades. I find it hard to believe she didn't know about the agreement. It's a massive production done every year with millions spent to pull it off.
Furthermore. We're not talking about legality, here. We're talking about punishment by an employer. But if we're going to get into that, that agreement means her filming is harassment and she violated his right of privacy.
Exactly!
I don’t understand why the investigation is still ongoing. This seems to be an easy case to resolve: Joost, the camera person and any witnesses to the incident should already have been interviewed. There should also be video evidence. Since no charges have been filed, my guess is the EBU is going to wait until they finish investigating other claims of harassment during the festival (including the complaint filed by the Netherlands delegation, among others) before issuing a statement.
In real life, investigations and cases take a lot of time between analysis, hearings, bureaucracy... it's not like in Ace Attorney were all cases take up four days at worst, including the preliminary investigation
Joost and/or his lawyer wanted to have some more hearings made in the Netherlands, so this will most likely prolong this even more.
@@KyrieFortune in real life, this is a case with a specific number of witnesses and little analysis required. It’s not as if DNA analysis is needed, or any blood tests. It’s not a murder case, it’s a review of potential treats, intimidation and/or simple battery. Pretty sure if Sweden intended to prosecute, they would have already started the process. The EBU, no doubt, will drag out any private investigations and eventually issue some bland statement that satisfies no one.
The investigation is still going on because Joost and his team want more witnesses to be heard.
There would have been a court date soon if Joost's team hadn't insisted on more interviews with people that are now back in the Netherlands. Had the prosecutor refused, Joost could have appealed and draged this out for even longer.
the things that bother me the most about this is sure, if you have a zero-tolerance policy then fine, boot him. But the double-standard that multiple complaints were made about the Israeli delegation and press throughout the week rubs salt in the wound.
This shows just how quickly the EBU is able to make a decision and shows their bias (most likely due to MorrocanOil)
The other thing that bothers me a lot is the repeat specification by the EBU in their statetment that the camerawoman was a woman. Especially right off the bat when we had so little information, this changes the optics on the incident and due to what we know about this incident from Avrotros the gender has NOTHING to do with what happened and repeatedly bringing it up vilifies him and the EBU paints a picture of scary man vs. helpless woman
If word of mouth is true.... then the woman involved was not officially part of the Israeli delegation and there as an employee of EBU (though she is in fact Israeli and had indirectly accused Joost of being an anti-semite who didn't deserve to breathe the same air as her).
Everything I'm getting is provocation by this woman who should never have anything to do with EBU or Eurovision again.
That's just not libel. It barely implied anything, and I did not see a single person interpreting it as something sexual.
@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710you might be the first person I will tell to get on the internet lol
and what the "Israeli team" did different from other teams? they didn't do anything against the rules other then their job and unlike others they didn't ask anything political like others team. and the participate cry "omg how dare you ask me questions you bother me" while it's literally their job to ask questions! maybe next time don't come if you can't handle being ask questions. if anything maybe you have a double-standard against a sorting country?
@@mayaha200now what you’re saying is simply not true. There have been videos and reels made public where the Israeli delegation was PUBLICLY harassing other contestants. (Don’t believe me? Just look them up, they’re all over the internet. Unedited and everything)
There’s been a NUMBER of complaints from other delegations about them being Harassed and the EBU didn’t step in.
We don’t know if this was also due to the Israëli delegation that Joost has been disqualified, the EBU IS using two standards when it’s coming to Israël right now.
2024 is annus horrbilis for Eurovision
I remember being at home getting some food ready when I heard this on the news. I didn’t know who they were at the time until I listened to europapa and now I understand why everyone is saying free joost but this video is amazing and AMTV never fails to keep my attention good job adam!
Nothing will change. Moroccan oil is still the sponsor and Israel have confirmed their participation for 2025
they could end with half participants opting out, that would be worse than closing, a terrible, very terrible PR
@@pierluigidipietro8097 honestly I kinda hope Iceland Ireland Netherlands Norway Finland and Spain all pull out. Even though I would be devastated and I love these countries plus I'm Irish and we need that 8th win 😂😅 but yeah this year was so horrible and messy that change needs to happen
But there is an independent investigation into all the claims against the Israelis. Will anything come of it? idk but at least it's an encouraging sign.
@@erinnadia0409
If you want a Eurovision Song Contest that only nations with strong human rights records can compete in. Would you advocate additional nations being banned as well such as Azerbaijan & Kazakhstan?
@@erinnadia0409 I think Finland at least already is participating in 2025
Joost's song is a banger if you believe me.
The issue I have with a zero-tolerance policy is that it is largely untenable, as it can be exploited by bad actors. Imagine that next year, the top 3 most likely to win are Armenia, Belgium and Portugal for example, and a certain staffer doesn't want Belgium to win. What's to stop them from pestering the Belgian delegation in order to provoke a reaction, then level a complaint and get them suspended immediately, as required by this precedent?
Joost's disqualification and the way the incident was handled does set an incentive for causing these kinds of issues and raising allegations. Allegations that can spiral out of control and damage artists outside of the Eurovision too. In declaring this 'zero tolerance' policy, the EBU has endangered participating artists.
So you would rather let everyone bully and abuse the entire production crew than have the very slim chance that someone uses this rule maliciously?
@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710 'Punish nothing' is not the only alternative to 'Punish everything'.
He also eat the onion that his parent lay beside his bed when he was sick and told him do not eat the onion Joost.
DON'T EAT THE ONION JOOST
Have yall seen the tiktoks he's posted literally eating a red onion in a luchtballon
None of us knows what happened. So we can’t if the disqualification was right or wrong. we just have to see what happens when the legal system is finished with it. Then we hear more what happened
The only right thing to do was, have him perform than wait until the trial verdict. if he is convicted, disqualify him and remove him the way they removed him now. and if he'd won the number 2 will be the winning country. If he's acquitted no harm would have been done. It is that simple and i hate that nobody thought that way. It's still INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY
Definately not.
A - Innocent until proven guilty ONLY applies to the legal system 🤦♀️ i.e. the EBU has no requirement to follow that principle
B - Harm could absolutely have been done. An allegation of him threatening someone to make them fear for their safety is very serious, and if this could happen once it could happen again. So him being there meant that he posed a risk to the safety of the crew.
C - Allowing 2nd place to be the winner if he was convicted is a terrible idea. At the earliest you would be 2 months into ESC 2025 preparations and now you'd have to abandon the plans and start new ones in another country, several months late. If he appeals or something it could take the large part of the year, if not several years to get a conclusive verdict and then you've completely f*ed up 2025's contest.
@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710 well, they completeky ffed up eurovision now anyway. Prove is in the pudding with nemo only 4th most popular artist at the moment.
A i get what you're saying about a winner country having to start months later with preperations. But there were still many other ways this could have been handled. It's already proven by both the investigating officer and lawyers that no ohysical hamr was done, and no threat was made. - it's amready been established that joost didn't want to be filmed after coming down from the stage and the EBU agreed to his terms. so what did happen? We will only know when we see the videos, but that moment in time will look worse than it was as those moments captured on camera wil show every frustration he had still being harrassed after settling he wouldn't be.
The problem with todays world is that even the smallest of run ins can be called hate crimes. Just asked Scotland where it's been a complete joke and out of control and incredibly expensive as every one of the 1000 'hate' crimes complaints they get every single day because of that new law have to be investigated.
Joost also immediatly after he touched the phone of the woman who then dropped it wanted to talk with her and appoligize. he tried this a few times but she refused.
this is not a loving enviremont and this is not a world where people think about others. They just want to be victimezed and get props for it.
If this happened in 90% of other countries it would have been brushed off, a hug would have been given, if the phone broke, a new phone would have been provided wrapped and deliver with a cake and all would be well.
The EBU could have handled this in so many different ways, the Dutch gave them many different options to handle this.
The dozen complaints of the other countries about the bad work enviremont casued 'by' the EBU were all brushed off and not addressed, also the one the Dutch made a day before this incident happened. That has to tel you something
Thank god there are a lot of investigations going at the moment cause things really have to chance
@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710 but he didn't threaten someone, if he did he wouldn't be allowed to travel freely. The law in Sweden is harsh against these things, he wouldn't be free right now, already proving that whatever happened wasn't as big as the EBU makes it out to be
@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710and why was Israel still allowed to be there when they also threatened other teams? Why weren't they disqualified
@@mitchystuff because she didn't
In my opinion the Netherlands should definitely withdraw, what happened can straight up be considered sabotage since I'm positive that Joost would have won the whole contest. In the case that Avrotros decides to participate again, Joost should be given another chance and be sent again, mostly to piss off the corrupted, double sided and and hypocritical EBU. I'll say it again, a withdrawal is justified and very much needed, also to make the other countries understand that all that went down this year, is mafia activity basically.
I think it was unprecedented for. They made an agreement he wouldn’t be filmed, and he was filmed! It was an emotional moment for him, as this was for his parents that died when he was a child. If he told the to -fuck- off or something along those lines.
Norway confirmed they will follow the Netherlands, no participation without the necessary changes.
I hope they actually do, along with the other countries that made a claim likewise: Ireland, Lithuania, Switzerland...
Avro Tros has a zero tolerance policy... what about the woman that kept photographing Joost against his will?
Can you prove that?
@@JeffFisher-ip9py can you prove Joost did anything wrong?
@@JeffFisher-ip9py what?
According to the (Swedish) Prosector (on Dutch TV there might be camera footage, but he wasn’t sure. So far he didn’t see it…
Don’t think the EBU was very European this year
Maybe it will be renamed to IBU for next year.
Joost and the team knew of his emotional state and proactively put in their agreement for no cameras to help mitigate a situation such as this (as much as we know anyway). Was there more than one person filming Joost or just this one person? I’m confused why she didn’t stop to wonder where all the other cameras were. It will be interesting to see all the details when they come out.
The main problem for smaller nations can be seen on official scorecards where the ratings are based on song, performance and staging because smaller broadcasters have far less to spend on staging. Compare the UK which looked expensive on screen like a music video (and was) with Croatia which looked budget (and was). If Croatia had the UK budget, they may have won.
Israel would have won if the judges weren’t antisemitic goons.
The music is nice and such a banger tho also a great video on what happening about him tho
As a Dutch person myself I would LOVE it if my country withdrew for a couple of years.
It’s been unacceptable what has been done and I’d rather see this kind of money be spend on our own artists instead of a dictatorial organization that can disqualify nations as they please WITHOUT giving the broadcaster their money back AND threatening them to broadcast it.
I fully stand with AVROTROS on this and think it’s a show of character that they KEEP having Joosts back.
I also hope, but that’s not up to me, that other broadcasters follow AVROTROS in this and also withdraw for a couple of years.
This year has been a dumpster fire from the get go and now the EBU is reaping the rewards for this mess. 👍
Where’s the popcorn 🍿
You clearly don't know what 'dictatorial' means 😂
"Without giving their money back"??? This isn't Amazon, there is no 30 day return policy. Joost got himself disqualified and if AvroTros didn't want to 'lose' their money, they should have sent someone who could handle their emotions.
@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710 I know exactly what it means and I mean it in every sense of the word.
When the EBU takes something like this for granted, which they do, then it is in my believe the RIGHT of a broadcaster to ask for a refund because they’re not allowed to continue with something they bought.
I don’t know if you understand this, but it’s NOT the broadcaster that’s paying for this. It’s the people of the nation. (At least in NL it is!)
Maybe do a little research before you say something like this to me 👍
@@peasemaker4 You clearly don't because the decision to DQ Joost was unaniomously supported by the executive board which is ELECTED by the EBU's members.
AvroTros paid that fee knowing fully that if they were DQed or had to withdraw during the contest they would not get it back. If the people of the Netherlands don't like that, either:
A - Don't send a contestant that is going to get themselves disqualified, or
B - Don't participate at all.
It might also not be as easy as "person broke filming agreement" - maybe there was a superior who told her to film. She might just be a person trying to keep her job. These are variables we can not know. I just hope there will be a resolution everyone can accept and that there is a way forward.
I love Eurovision and I'd hate for this to break this show of European unity. ♥️
Or even just a miscommunication. Apparently she was meant to film everyone except for Joost but maybe she never got the message.
I’m so tired of people who think it’s all ok that he should have been removed, do they even understand Joost was still there? And at after parties, in the dressing room. They never send him away as he was a supposed danger. ALL people incl contestant should have a safe work environment. If you start provoking, like isreal does and there are multiple examples of it, they want the other party to react so they can blame them. The law recognizes provocative behavior and as Joosts was just a gesture, and normal if you said no first, when annoyed. There is no reason he would be found guilty. EBU should NOT make those decisions and like on the work floor, this should be done by a neutral party. They did nothing with all the complaints of 13 contestants. Clearly contestants and counties aren’t important. Well if that’s the case, I agree the Netherlands should not spend time and money, into something, they don’t stand behind. And for people who think that’s good. It means other countries need to pay more, and the Netherlands also provided ebu with resources, like their knowledge in lighting, filming etc. If ebu refuses to change and do the blame game… we should make a new version, the EuroVoice. .
You clearly have no idea what you are talking about
@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710 because Avro tros and NPO is wrong right ? They are not friends with Joost. They are the Dutch public broadcasters, funded like any else’s by taxpayers. And they just released a statement they wouldn’t participate, not just next year, but never, if ebu doesn’t change. This is 1:) the way they treat their contestants and their rights and 2) a transparent neutral party that decides regarding disagreements and complaints But you know better right? And yes the Dutch does pay in more then others so if they don’t participate, other countries need to contribute more, plus their knowledge lighting and filming is superb, one only needs to look at 2021 when they hosted it. And yes they freely help other countries with their knowledge. And that is if you ask Dutch people who eventually fund all of this, if they would do it again after next year. And that be a no for the first time a large majority says no.
@@helenaterschegget8791 They could absolutely be wrong. Either because they are lying to save face or because they have been lied to or misled by Joost and his team. Just because they are funded by taxpayers doesn't mean that they will do what is in the best intrest of tax payers.
@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710 they were THERE actually as witnesses, you forget that they are THE DUTCH DELEGATION, the bubble that’s surround any Dutch contestant, before Joost and they would have after. But sure enough 13 countries are lying right. I’m fairly sure many other countries at this time think is it even worth it. The press is wrong. Everybody is wrong because you say so.
Avro tros and NPO is a public company, and has no ties nor friends with joost. They broadcast, and support the whatever contestant. This was already going on with s10, who just published a documentary which follows her during HER Eurovision and she says the same, her boundaries were overstepped again and again, she also explained the contracts, which says nothing about you just be filmed. She acknowledges, this time obvious due to other factors it was worse. You would still say it’s a lie even if all those dancers, and other delegation said it in your face, and they did
Ebu won’t have any product without countries. These are the type of comments, that the Dutch journey ends, and I can guarantee you that won’t be the only ones either. So good luck
@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710 im sorry, but you are the one in the wrong here. I dont know from witch country you are, but a broadcaster like avotros could never ever be "misled" by joost. I am dutch and trust me, we take 'funded by tax payers' very seriously. I, as a dutch person, was actually suprised that avotros showed that they really stood behind joost. They normally dont do that, especcialy by something as big as eurovision. I think that everything they say in thier statement is true
Israel was the big culprit in this esc edition, this delegation threatened several other delegations.
I can't find much evidence of them doing that tho. Except for a stylist, it was mostly Israeli journalists doing the 'harassing'
@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710the journalists are part of the delegation
Eden Golan couldn't leave her hotel room and had to be accompanied by security because of the situation, so excuse me if I don't care about Joost being booted for being an entitled asshole.
let's accuse Israel With Everything that Happened there, Shall we? Where are the evidence?
Yes, they should have behaved as adults. It was a song contest, not a war. All in all, think they should never allowed Israël in. But heard the are the biggest sponsor?
10:39 That just doesn't seem very likely tho. People love to bring up that the Netherlands is a 'big contributor' but it's still only 4 or 5% of the total participation fees.
That averages out to an extra €8 grand for every broadcaster, but in reality this would likely be distributed less evenly.
If it was distributed like the current fees are e.g. Moldova would only see a rise in about €1000 which might still be too much for them, but it definately won't be a "mass exodus"
Norway already said they will follow the Netherlands, no participation unless things will change.
@@MariaMariamuzieklove Ok and? People have made threats throughout this year's competition as well. Doesn't mean that they'll act upon them.
06:13 bro if the internet finds out who was harassing Joost she is done for.
Το τραγούδι αυτό έμελλε να κερδίσει τον διαγωνισμό ... έλα όμως που ο διαγωνισμός αυτός δεν είναι πλέον διαγωνισμός τραγουδιού, αλλά πολιτικής ... χρόνια τώρα ... και στην συγκεκριμένη περίπτωση, φαίνεται πως ο Ολλανδός τραγουδιστής εναντιώθηκε, όπως κι οι περισσότεροι συνάδελφοί του, στην ισραηλινή βαρβαρότητα ... κι αυτό είναι που του στοίχισε τελικά ... για να μην εμπλακούν όμως άμεσα οι ισραηλινοί, κατασκευάστηκε (ή ενδεχομένως αξιοποιήθηκε) ένα δευτερευούσης σημασίας περιστατικό ... και πάρτον κάτω τον επίδοξο νικητή ... όμορφος κόσμος, αγγελικά πλασμένος ... europapa
WHOA THAT IS SOME HAIR HOLY SHIT
when it comes to this incident even though it is wrong to try and threaten a person, i feel like there is a bit of a gap between threatening and getting disqualified, the situation was pourly dealt with by the EBU, and i feel that it is fair for Joost and Avrotros to be very angry with the EBU.
BTW in your video around 14:15 you say something in the lines of "god forbid that he could have hurt her", it is confirmed by Avrotros that Joost never touched her so no need to even speculate on that.
Yes, that’s framing.
I hope whatever happened will be made public, because as it stands my impression is that he just (maybe/probably aggressively?) pushed the camera away or something, and if that was the case then everything was an overreaction
There's so much focus on the threats but nothing about the situation that lead to the threats, as far as I'm aware the woman was never reprimanded for her actions in this.
To me the fact that the powers to be prefer to jeopardize the future of the Contest, rather than actually do something to preserve the longevity of it (and come on, we all know exactly what needs to be done, but given the fact the grand sponsor's origin I doubt it) speaks volumes of the leverage certain sponsors and/or states have on the EBU. I mean, this year we've actually verged on blackmailing in order to promote a certain agenda and very quickly the whole occasion which usually is jolly and silly, turned sour. For next year, if nothing changes and many countries will choose to abstain as a result, the Contest won't be even worth watching ironically...
The sponsor might have some minor influence but definately not to the extent that you are talking about.
The EBU cannot unilaterally suspend a member unless they have consistently broken EBU rules outside of ESC. The only way the EBU would suspend them is if the vast majority of its members support it, which just isn't the case rn.
I agree with that, but in that case the double standards concerning the Russian suspension is apparent and undeniable. Unfortunately the ESC in nowadays just a platform for specific political agendas. Sure, we had political incidents before, starting actually from my country Greece, which in 1976 sent a song as a protest of the Turkish invasion in Cyprus, allegedly the singer Mariza Koch was wearing a bulletproof vest underneath her dress because there were many threats for her life by Turkish extremists living in The Netherlands where the contest took place then. But those were instigated by the participating countries, now the platform to promote those agendas in centralized and too much in your face in my opinion.
@@PanosDCC The thing is though from the EBU's perspective there is no double standard with Russia.
The EBU wasn't going to exclude either of them, until its members disagreed. But whilst in Russia's case the EBU's members did call for Russia's expulsion, the same d idn't happen (at a wide enough scale) for Israel.
And whilst you could still call that a double standard, it's a double standard from thr broadcasters not the EBU, and the EBU can't do anything to change that without risking the collapse of the contest.
@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710
The EBU should have been more willing to reject banning Russia & Belarus quite frankly. Mainly because it has set a dangerous precedent that nobody will end up enjoying.
@@MrSmith1984 They were willing to punish Belarus. Belarus was suspended in 2021 long before the war for violating other EBU rules.
And had the EBU unilaterally banned Russia that would have set an even more dangerous precedent. The EBU isn't an international court, and therefore it isn't their job to judge countries on their actions but if they had banned Russia they could start banning other countries on more arbitrary things.
Them not wanting to ban Russia or Israel, though annoying, at least guarentees that any future decision would have to be reasonable and well supported.
When I saw how politics play a role in music.. I still don't believe anything.. And it makes me angry.. Russia banned, and Isreal in this.. Uniting people..
When its a joke, then quit..
I'm Italian and I only watched Eurovision for Joost Klein and they completely ruined it
thing is i do think the ebu went with the safe call because you cannot allow someone to perform with that sort of alligation
Exactly
My issue is if they protected joost from.being filmed this incident wouldn't have happened
Ok ppl, please tell me what you would have thought if He wasn't DISQ, and that EBU didn't do anything about it, when a possible crime had accrued (it's on film). What would ppl have said then....???
When Joost was disqualified than Eurovision 2024 died a little bit for me!!! He was my 2nd place after Baby Lasagna!!!
We don't have any concrete evidence or anything. Putting aside the legal principal of innocent before proven guilty, people defending the disqualification cannot possibly keep using the claim that he *could* be prosecuted as definitive evidence that he did wrong. It's been so long now, if there was indeed a credible case, they should've moved forward already.
At a huge show like this there must have been witnesses. If this was anything, Swedish police would have dealt with it immediately.
IF Joost was filmed against his will backstage. Whatever he did, was captured on camera. So at some point we will get to see what happened (or not in case of foul play by eurovision)
I can absolutely see Dutch walking away from 2025 if they don't want to see that as an implicit admission of guilt.
Sometimes it's perception rather than reality. What those involved think happened this. You can write or say something innocently and it will be taken in a way that is totally unattended. Especially if mental health is involved. - We don't know these people so we are clueless. The victim could very well be a victim.
It's a tough call as I wasn't there, but I'd like to have seen his song and think they should have played it, that EV didn't need any more controversy than it already had. if all he did was yell at them for doing something they expressly agreed not to do then did anyway, I understand. but until we know more who can say?
I am on the fence regarding the "female staff member" not having made a public statement. Considering how She was the one who broke contract, and then She cried wolf after Joost reacted perhaps aggressively, sure, but I'm also certain that the clause was added to avoid a situation just like this so one could argue this was provocation... Since Joost is already being punished, both of them should be investigated with the woman being terminated from her position - as she is clearly not intelligent enough to respect a contract, and also not empathetic enough to respect a fellow human's request and pain - and be fined at the very least. The EBU is protecting "their staff" but not the performers without whom there would be no Eurovision ?
Does anyone understand what a contract is? 😂 There wasn't one here
@@driekeijlders281 A we don't know that. AvroTros have been very vague, just saying that there were "agreements".
B That's because unlike AvroTros, SVT respect criminal investigations and therefore won't make comments that could interfere with them.
@@driekeijlders281 Provide some evidence of these 'statements' then.
@@driekeijlders281 no I made the claim that they did not release a statement or any comments about what they believe happened. Now prove me wrong or admit to being wrong.
@@driekeijlders281 😂🤦♀️ They absolutely do not. Every single one says something like "the police said this...", "sources say this...", etc.
Thank you for admitting to being wrong.
Let me answer your question. Yes, this is the first time that any country has been disqualified during the actual contest.
They dq him so fast like he didnt have a chance to defend himself like what the fuck?they didnt even finished their investigation...
I listened to Europapa in reverse its a hit 😂😂
Im trying to reserve judgement and give the EBU a fair shake but damn they suck at communication
It's an active criminal investigation. Unlike AvroTros, the EBU and SVT respect that and won't make comments that interfere with that.
It's not you. It's a sample of Richard Marx his song.
What to me is such a stain on the image of EBU is that while claiming the harsh reaction came from a noble place of trying to keep everybody safe, this standard did CLEARLY not apply to Joost himself and the fellow contestants' safety and privacy. EBU did NOT take the privacy and safety of artists and personnel seriously enough UNTIL there was a an incident. A certain country had a reporter in the delegation, going totally against the journalistic integrity of any other media personnel strictly prohibited from delegations-only spaces. Videos of artists both contestants and guests were published without the knowledge or permission from them. The amount of clips where artists are followed by media people while clearly expressing disinterest to be filmed is gross. Multiple delegations were at the emergency meeting with EBU representatives for these concerns, going apparently unheard, but a single incident stemming from EBU neglecting to ensure privacy and boundaries for artists in the first place was what lead to this extend of repercussions - not for EBU, but a participant. It's such a platant copout in my opinion, details be damned.
I sincerely hope they are currently negotiating Österdahl's step-down. I've been saying it, and will continue to: EBU had it coming and deserves all the struggle they brought onto themselves by pisspoor leadership this year. I wish for no mass exodus, but I hope broadcasters will be using their voices ever more and more emphasis will be put on the collaboration of national broadcasters instead of over the dictatorship of EBU. Avrotros deserves an apology regardless and overall delegation poor sportsmanship as well as outright bad behavior should also be open for repercussions. I care way more about what was going on in the multiple delegatiions and EBU emergency meating and why their concerns were not heard than the outcome of the investigation of a single incident. Keeping up appearances for mere PR with little to no accountability on part of leadership, non-existent communication to the public and seemingly unfair and inequal attention to keeping up rules is no longer enough.
Why would Österdahl step down?
The EBU is absolutely not a dictatorship. For example, the decision about Joost was backed by the reference board (with producers and editors from 9 broadcasters) and unanimously supported by the elected executive board (with the heads of 10 broadcasters).
Just because they make fair decisions that you don't like doesn't make them a dictatorship.
And how about the woman who didn't work according the arrangement? That was ok? It's action/reaction. If she kept herself to the arrangement, nothing would've happend. AVRO TROS probably already saw the images, and still stand behind him. That says enough.
No response, how typical..... "me too" works both ways mister
I would’ve voted for Joost, the disqualification was sad
It would have been more special in person than on tv
what happened to him was disgusting he was robbed it should not have happen he was treated unfairly he had told them no photos leave him alone he was upset the song was for his mum and dad but still they bugged him he didn't deserve to be kicked out others have done worse
Ok and? He shouldn't have committed assault. Just because other people do bad things doesn't mean that you can do somthing much worse in return
Canceling the only song about Europe and uniting for such a small incident is bizarre. It could’ve been a party to unite Europe.
my two cents is that no one should be supporting Eurovision full stop
Onion corp... I actually read it as *Union* corp, a reference to eurovision xD
Your eyes are likely better than mine 😂
Did you know that the Hololive Vtuber Takanashi Kiara was going to take part in Eurovision with her song CHIMERA
2:57 a baikinman shapped balloon from the long running anime anpanman thats pretty random.
Yeah it sounds like it but sped up
It’s hypocritical of Klein to give Golan such a hard time while he has, apparently, collaborated with russian musicians in the past.
He just asked to not be recorded and this it what happens
No he committed assault. And now he is suffering the consequences
@@JeffFisher-ip9pyHe only pushed the camera away, he didn’t physically attack the woman though.
Not a single mention of Israel?
That's another video entirely lol
Eurovision is now in DEEP shit. The EBU handled that horribly. Netherlands is a big contributor to the contest, if they leave, the price of participation for smaller countries will rise and countries won’t be able to pay for it. It’s just gonna create a domino effect. I honestly won’t be surprised if next year or the year after there won’t even be semi-finals 😭😭
I also still don’t understand why Israel can compete I mean they are in war so if they apparently don’t care about war they bring Russia back (I also don’t understand why did Israel make Moroccanoil I mean what)
Yup 👍
BABE WAKE UP
NEW ADAM MARTYN VIDRO JUST DROPPED
If AvroTros decide to pull out in the future, it could go to any other member of the EBU in the Netherlands to broadcast it. In the UK, if the BBC pulled out, ITV plc. are also EBU members and would certainly be keen. I expect to see the Netherlands back so long as their viewers want it.
Thats not how public television broadcasting works in The Netherlands. EBU rights are managed bij the governing body of the public broadcasters (NPO) not by AvroTros directly.
If AvroTros pulls out; nobody will participate in Eurovision, but the broadcast will still be managed bij de NPO.
@@Cluendair Thanks, I do hope to see them back. Always liked the 75 winner.
Op vakantie? Niet naar Zweden.
If it's so easy to get into trouble, who would be confident to visit there?
Ok great. We don't want people who condone assault
@@ar50000It's not. It's just that, unlike what many Dutch people want, Swedish police aren't going to treat someone differently because they're popular.
didn’t Joost literally just push a camera away
zero tollerance in 2024 is not what it was 2 years ago. The way the woke world has changed is scary and will only backfire at some point. I come from an era where we're not scared to say what we want, or get angry when someone screws up or something goes wrong. It's the way to get the best product in the end. No BS, just actual results. Now the second the production, whatever it may have been is over, everyone is to their lovely self and we all go out for drinks and fun and love eachother deerly. it's the same thing in restaurants. Chefs are complete aholes to their staf during the 2 hours of service. The second it's over they're the loveliest person in the world. And everyone knows why it's done like that, cause the chef has a product and image to protect. all this tip toeing workspace atmosphere is ruining a lot of businesses. Especially in the creative world where creative people are very protective of their work and want the best result that's in their head, and will become a huge drustrating point if no one else gets it (which is 80% of the time) - These persons have short fuses but they love you with all their being. If you know that, and if you know a person is like that, you can accept the 'bad' moments as well... sorry, rant over lol
This so called female was a tiktok employee, also an advertiser in Eurovision song contest? So also contradictory like Moroccan oil? Could this have influenced the disqualification?
Prove it
@@JeffFisher-ip9py if I tell a fib, I got this from a source nearby! So if I told a fib with a source! It will al come out eventually! If I was wrong I will say so too! It makes more sense, a tik tok photographer would like to be invasive. As a new contributor to Eurovision?
@@dvdb59 You said it was a tiktok employee. Prove it or admit to lying.
@@JeffFisher-ip9py just wait and be patient! Why are you so impatient? Do you know the "truth?"
Try and find performers who dare to go to eurovision and put their freedom and bank account in the hands of one person.
You're the master of the humblebrag, i'll give you that, lol...
🇪🇺💙🇪🇺
EBU gives me FIFA vibes. And that is not a good thing. Joost case will be just the first step into a further s@#€€ storm. It has all the hallmarks for it.
Making the broadcaster responsible and put ANOTHER punishment on them IS a sure way to NEVER get the country of broadcaster ever wanting to come back. Disqualification is already been a punishment, plus they paid also. It is the exact insane FIFA thinking... we can boss everyone around with no backlash.
This all, even if Joost was wrong.
I'm Dutch and I'm not watching. I hope we withdraw for at least next year.
everyone being in uproar that he was RGIHTFULLY disqualified, people in uproar moaning how Israeli women still gets to perform when she literally did nothing wrong
It’s ridiculous isn’t it?
It takes a day for smear money to reach a bank account.
To be honest, I'm not really sure what else Österdahl/the ESC could have done on that day. The only other options I can think of given the circumstances would be to either let Joost Klein compete as if nothing happened, or to postpone the final to a later date when the investigation was done. Allowing Klein to compete regardless would have been controversial in a similar (but not identical) way to how Golan was allowed to compete, and spectators and competitors alike would have been up in arms if they were all told "Sorry, come back later once we've sorted this mess out".
I'm not saying that disqualifying Klein was the right decision. Just that, aside from those other two unpopular choices, I literally can't think of anything else they could have done.
I think the police involvement may have forced their hand to disqualify Joost.
It was definately the right decision, even if he is later proven innocent. There was a strong possibility that he committed assault against a member of the production crew, meaning that he was now a risk to the crew.
They could have let him compete in The final, and later when the court'd have given the verdict, then EBU could disqualify him if necessary from the results.
@@annalyon2729 That would have been a really dumb decision. His actions meant that he posed a risk towards the production crew so he should be removed from that situation as soon as possible.
@@Gfynbcyiokbg8710 He didn't pose any real threat, and he apologized to the camera woman straight away too.
it’s a contract for a fucking reason ebu get a sense
Except it's not
Just WHO ? i didnt notice at all in fact I never even knew you existed.. you are one of those people who think because you on youtube your oppinion matters more than anyone else. I have watched eurovisioon sins I was 5 got really excited when brotherhood of man won ... If the police are involved it is totally appropriate to remove a potential criminal
Kaarija and joost klein didnt deserve the horrors of eurovision. Biased ahh jurys and ebu
No excuse to threaten a person. Some artists think they are above the law. If he did threaten that lady, then he deserved the disqualification.
No person was threatened.
Omg did we just witness the final Eurovision
I think the text was a little bit too heated for the EBU, so they created this incident. He definitely would have had won the Song Contest by public votes.
Joost wouldn't have won regardless. Even if he had gotten a huge televote score (likely by taking a big chunk out of Croatia), the juries wouldn't have given him the support he needed and given him a low score
Get rid of the reporter 😮
For there being a miscommunication?
What I’m most annoyed about is that literally every Eurovision video has comments spammed with: JUSTICE FOR JOOST, HE SHOULD BE IN 2025 etc etc and its SO ANNOYING
I hope those comments keep popping up next year
@@Lioney I don’t.
Thats what happens when a lot of people think something was super unfair
On holiday to Sweden? No.
Oh no 😱 What will Sweden do without one more tourist
3rd😊