Every artist at Eurovision has three minutes to showcase their talent. Every artist at Eurovision also spends six months of their life, building up to this one moment. They need respect, they need personal space too
just for doing something you want to do, and put some time in it - is not something to respect. That is the minumum you should do if you want something. Thats it.
@@NearioNL Got it, we shouldn't respect you for what you do. For everyone else in the world, working to achieve something deserves respect. Being a little troll on the internet doesn't.
They ( famous people) deserve respect. However, there are people who never ever get any respect. 💔😔 A worthless person like me just gets bullying. Famous people can always solve things, they can hire lawyers etc.
Joost is also neurodivergent and therefore it was important to AVROTROS that he was protected. That is why these boundaries and agreement was put into place with the EBU before his performance. He is known to get overwhelmed when he is emotional and needs a few moments to collect himself afterwards. Although this doesn't justify anything, it does explain why he reacted the way he did and why this agreement was made in the first place - to protect himself and others around him. He apologised straight after many times, showing what happened was not intentional.
You say "if he's found guilty, he's [...] going to face the consequences" 6:17 The problem is, he has faced the consequences before he's found guilty. He isn't even tried yet. A basic law in probably all of Europe is: you're innocent until proven guilty, but the EBU has crushed even such a basic principle. If Joost is found "not guilty", how are they going to make up for it? Do the complete event over? Turn back time? It was a stupid decision. It's also a slap in the face of all other contestants, for they will never know if they truly earned the spot they got, seeing that Joost's song was the most played song on Spotify for instance. The EBU has disgraced the contest and they should face the consequences.
That's how all me-too cases work today, kill a career and let a judge prove something happened after the fact. In both cases one side takes all the blame even if there isn't any and the other side has no risks what so ever. It's a pretty sick movement that exist only to bring men down and give women a false sense of worth which in the end serves nobody.
You said if guilty Joost will have to face the concequences i agreee that's the way it should be! It might be forbidden to make any unwanted move towards employers or even break swedish law. But by removing Joost his team and the entire Dutch nation that supported him was already judged prosecuted and sentenced before truth finding..
Interesting, but why do you brush aside a possible connexion between what Joost said during the press conference and his disqualification? As a neurodivergent person, I can tell you that every single one of our actions or remarks, because they are unpredictable and embarrassing (his was in this case just a question, and the hiding under the flag thing - all of this seems quite relatable to me but it is only the tip of the iceberg) piss off so many top brass who think themselves beyond any reproach or question that they frequently take every opportunity they have to get rid of us. The psychological factor is important too.
What I also mean is that a personality like Joost could clearly have made a live political statement. The guy is just honest and doesn't care about other people's opinions - hence his question in the press conference. That would explain the disqualification (because honestly, considering the elements we have, the worst that could have happened is him pushing away a camera, and making it fall and break, and even in that case the sanction is completely disproportionate: depriving an entire country of its candidate for such a petty case !!)
If there is a connection, again I would say it's to the atmosphere and not the incident. Also according to the sequence of events, the altercation happened before the press conference. When people were in the dark about what the cause was, they had speculated that it was because of Joost's interjection that he had been prevented from rehearsing. That ended up being false. You could suggest that his behaviour in the press conference had negatively affected his image with the members of the Reference Group, making them more inclined to disqualify him. But that would be inferring something that might not be necessary. The incident in isolation was substantial enough that some action needed to be taken. The disagreement between AVROTROS and the EBU is whether or not is was appropriate to removed the Netherlands from the competition altogether without considering alternatives.
@@stu_makes_vids @blidgi The incident was more an Indicator on the whole problem, neurodivergent people often experience that earlier than neurotypicals because of more sensitivity. The difference being Joost needed that time and the other artist would of wanted more time in between to proces the madness surrounding the experience. And frankly treated like they were a person with emotions, being human not just a product.
I dont think his supposed critique of Israel was the cause. I wasn't even critique. The neuro divergent behavior in extrema made him a liability; highly popular act in line before the israeli act. What if he would have made a remark re gaza at the end of his set in the final. The arena might have gone into riots. I don't think he would have done that; I can't rule out the organization considered that a big problem, they were under very high pressure possible used an otherwise minor incident to solve that.
Hiding under a flag had nothing to do with the Jewish singer or her team, Look up Joost Florida 2009 and then you realize he has been doing this hiding like since he became an artist. He is emotional when talking about his diseased parents till the point of breaking. So after songs where his parents are adressed he always hides when camera's or photographers are present. He hates being filmed or photographed during that emotional state.
I don't understand, if the problem was associated that she was filming, then there is clear film of what happened. Why would they not release any of that and let us see what exactly happened?
Because it's a legal case now and that is evidence. Usually these kinds of things are embargoed to avoid the influence of public opinion before the court's decision
@@stu_makes_vids Well, by imposing the penalty they influenced the incident far more than the releasing of the video would do. Then you have the issue of being found guilty before any court says you are.
Poor S10, she thought it must have been a cultural difference that the EBU was so pushy and demanding to her, like it was different in Italy compared to the Netherlands. This seems like something of a "me too" movement among Eurovision artists is going on.
For what reason do they have a need of filming the artists on their entire way to the green room? And if it really was that serious that cameraperson could just have done a complaint to the police on her phone in five minutes. The police interpretate things in a way that benefit them and they were so sure they had enough "evidence" to charge him with. In Sweden you're unfortunately punished for protecting your boundraries, your property especially after metoo. If the dutch delegation intended to solve it with her, it could have been done with just like that. It's on her for not taking that peace-offer. This is disproportionate and really a waste of taxmoney. Even if she didn't knew about any agreements she should have just had listen, that's it.
But after all; Joost is now the most famous participant ever, and his "Europapa" is a big hit world wide. As Johan Cruijf once mentioned; 'Elk nadeel heb zijn voordeel.'
I don't think the controversy lead to more streaming of Europapa. It's just a really good Eurovision song! And if he would've performed I think it would've been streamed even more than it already does!
@@MartijnPennings He is even sampling "Overthinking It" 's end conclusion from the comparison video they did of Olly and Joost, in his new song Luchtballon
I guess the likes of ABBA, Celine Dion l, Måneskin & Loreen to name a few have never existed then. If Joost is suddenly the “most famous participant ever”
This years Eurovision was a total disaster. All the artists are constantly being watched and they need respect and personal space. And after a bit of theorizing I do believe Isreal was intentionally behind his disqualification, especially after watching how the Isrealian team was constantly harassing artists that challenged Eden. Joost, Bambie Thug, Nemo and a few other artists that voiced their opinion in some way was basically targeted by the isreali team. When it comes to what actually happened back stage: I am a firm believer that Joost had no malicious intent towards the camerawoman, she did not respect his boundaries and to be disqualified over standing up for himself is such a drastic thing to do. Its sad to see how his dream got crushed in this way, especially when Europapa was dedicated to his dead parents and him being very emotional after his performance. Allthough we have to take everything with a grain of salt unless Avrotros og Joost himself makes a statement. Both fans and "haters" are quick to spread misinformation about this whole situation.
What right has any of these "artists" got to single out an individual to explain a countries actions? I thought collective punishment was bad? Would any German artist be asked to address Hitler? A Chinese the Uyghurs? Isn't a group attacking an individual bullying? And so on....... If he doesn't want attention he shouldn't be in the attention seeking business.
@@davidsoulsby1102 You’re comparing someone that supports their country doing genocide to actual war criminals. If Eden was israeli and pro palestine she wouldnt have been treated the same from the other artists. I dont even think she wouldve participated at all for palestine’s sake.
I'm not 'in' Eurovision, but I couldn't escape the news. You can't even write the name of a country in the right way. You really are thinking Jews are controlling the world. I feel sorry for you.
Really, all the other participating countries should have stood in and stopped the disqualification with the threat all walking. That is what solidarity looks like.
Are you serious ? I am Dutch, and so ashamed about that jerk. Sure camera's can be annoying, but you do not deal with it as a peasant. The way how he and others treated the Israeli singer was sick and Pathetic
@@monicacarolina6480 Joost may be a jerk, I don’t know. But he was judged and punished with disqualification without any transparent process. As an observer, this looks to me like a miscarriage of justice, and an inversion of due process. And for this alone, everyone needs to stand by him, because it places everyone else at risk of summary judgement. Injustice must be opposed for all our rights to be preserved.
@@monicacarolina6480 yeah, there are a few rotten apples in the Netherlands who can't help but hate on the guy. Most however seem to understand the situation a bit better and consider both sides of the argument and are willing to have some patience as to what is going on. Just believing one side and dismissing the other completely shows more about your character then it does about Joost.
Thanks for exposing your thoughts based on facts, impartially and in detail. It would be interesting in your next video that includes the state-funding voting, to also present in how many languages Eden spoke so as to attract votes from other countries (using AI short videos). As far as I know, she spoke greek, not knowing a single word of it, I suppose. A similar - though less - advertisement was done back in 2019 when Netta performed for Israel. However, this total 'ad thing' goes in contrast to the equal handling of the songs, which brings inequalities in their winning chances and destroys the sense of a fair contest, when some countries choose to advertise their songs, while some others not.
As a previous Eurovision multiple participant (over a span of 35 years) Eurovision has always been a celebration between artists, press, fans closely monitored by EBU who usually protects the organizing broadcaster/production. What happened this year was beyond belief. BUT what every participant should know is the huge amount of attention they will receive and endless exposure to media as well as various other obligations. It is a fine balancing act between PR, rehearsing and performing at the top of one’s game. Every artist should be prepared for this, both physically and mentally. Just saying.l It’s not an easy task, especially without the proper support team around you. I truly hope that such unprecedented nonsense and controversy will never happen again. OH, and no more double standards from the “untouchables” at EBU
Joost’s laywer has seen even the initial evidence of this case and allegedly believes that he could be acquitted. However: As someone who has followed Joost since December and witnessed all of his pre season promotional campaign: If you really want to nitpick: “WHY NOT” was not Joost’s first indirect to direct challenge of the EBU / Eurovision. Over the entire reason, he has kept trying finding reasons to challenge their promotional content, insert pro-peace anti-war political messages into their promos (the same kind of messages artists were censored and punished for during the Grand Final disaster as they lost any and all control with their own bodily autonomy) with him wearing activist shirts, he has name dropped the EBU before in a negative yet joking light without realizing the weight of his words, he removed and unpinned from view his collaborated Eurovision Instagram stuff that he had pinned, he posted next to nothing irl about anything related to Eurovision, he made some promotional videos become embarrassing and laughed about it, he supported his colleague’s post critiquing Eurovision back in March… I truly believe that if you want to search for possible other reasons as to why they possibly unfairly and borderline even illegally, harshened “it” to the point of disqualification, the evidence is there, but in small tidbits. It did not start at “WHY NOT”. He challenged them and possibly provoked them a tiny little bit for months. WHY NOT was the first public televised moment where things became very clear. And curiously: I did an Instagram marketing analysis on how often artists were promoted, and Joost, despite being consistently believed to be in top 5 most popular and betted on Artist, was the THIRD LEAST posted during the entire season all this time. Personally, about this incident thing, it speaks volumes that his lawyer thinks he could get all charges dropped in the court of law for a police investigation that was lacking of core witnesses present at the scene according to the latest updates from Swedish legal system. An EIO (European Investigation Order) has been issued and its now up to The Netherlands to investigate and interview the key witnesses that were missing from the incomplete police report and subsequent investigation that two boards at the EBU unanimously based their decision to disqualify on. All of this time we have had at least 2 of Joost’s eye witnesses neglected and ignored.
I also read that behind Joost stands again not only AVROTROS, but also the EBU member NOS. I didn’t know that was how it worked the first time around. AVROTROS lost 300 thousand Euros in advertising money on the Grand Final night because millions of Dutch households, possibly 2-3 million more than usual, boycotted the final. And yet, still they stand by him and even expand their stance, calling the disqualification not only out of proportion, but also unnecessary. 300 thousand euros is an enormous amount, I got it to 2 million SEK at the time of conversion. Unless AVROTROS are on a mission to destroy their reputation domestically and internationally forever, financial gain is not a factor in their stance. Combined with his lawyer’s statement, I find it very telling. But it is quite depressing for AVROTROS to have lost such a gigantic amount for something that they have claim repeatedly was not only out of proportion, but also unnecessary. If Joost’s neglected witnesses are able to support his innocence, EBU and Eurovision may have an uncontrollable scandal on their hands, and the contest may be forever changed from its original state.
Many people would ask for justice for Joost and it’s not clear that what is happening is justice. The deliberate baiting of a neurodivergent person in defiance of the protocols which were agreed to protect him is unethical and also may constitute an offence in many countries-and in fact may constitute in itself an assault-depending on the video which surprisingly has NOT been released . This incident may also indicate a willingness of the Swedish authorities to use Swedish law or for political purposes.The gold standard on this concept is the case of Julian Assange, a journalist currently fighting extradition to the US for offences in connection with the Wikileaks publications.Assange has spent over a decade fighting the Swedish authorities, in connections with cases which many commentators believe to be extremely weak.The fact is that the extradition of Assange to Sweden, where he could be readily extradited to the US and where he may face the death penalty was politically expedient.He is currently fighting extradition in the UK’s highest courts and the outcome is uncertain. It is not beyond credibility that Swedish authorities were prepared to manoeuvre to ensure there was no scandal for the contest if Israel had won which, at that point seemed quite likely -due potentially to the intense campaign conducted on behalf of its participant.
I know my idea is crazy and way out of the box, but maybe we should only let EUROpean counties compete in the EUROvision songcontest. And to be totally honest I would also prefer going back to the original concept of every country having to sing in their own language.
One theory is that the full DQ of Joost came because they wanted some kind of distraction, since there where lots of issues, issues the EBU did not want or could not do anything about. But hopefully there will be some clarity after the case is done but that will take some time Oh and NL is participating since the beginning 1956, so them considering to pull out does say something. Same with Norway who also did consider to pull out, who are participating since 1960.
There is only 1 in EBU who can disqualify persons. He does not have to say why. The EBU were putting everyone at risk. So saying that this has nothing to do with "that" incident is stupid.
If you annoy an organization, like Joost did at the press conference, you shouldn’t be surprised if they turn against you. Doesn’t mean that they had to do what they did. He was sentenced by EBU before the trial even began. The Swedish police said there was convincing evidence of bad conduct and the process would be a fast one. We still have to see this convincing evidence. It could exist, but we simply don’t know. But I think it isn’t a clear cut case, otherwise it would have been over by now. What should happen besides the police investigation, is an inquiry of the EBU and their decision process in this case. Transparency is the word here if we want to have another ESC next year.
So an organization felt like they where bullied and therefore disqualified him? So far there is no fast process and new info keeps popping up, none in defense of EBU.
I think Israel's interest got him refused. When he asked 'why not' he pointed at Gaza, let alone security risks. But the Israel lobby really didn't want them to be questioned, something that needed to e done very much!
Bullsh. Why didn't the supposed Israeli lobby get Ireland disqualified then, whose representative openly expressed their support to P-stine at the press conference?
If you take part in the contest you are on show 24/7 during your time there. If an artist feels uncomfortable with that then do not enter. An artist cannot "pick and choose" and behave like a diva as Joost did.
I do not think that disqualifying him only because he did not want to be filmed for some moments was fair. But I feel no pain because that song was not my favourite anyway. It's melody was half way good. But I did not get what it was about?
Idk if this is controversial but I personally think some people aren’t able to handle all the stress and fuzz that comes with participating in Eurovision. While Joost should not have been filmed if there was an agreement, at such a large event it isn’t surprising not everyone was made aware. Things will happen and as artists it’s important to handle it gracefully, all eyes are on them and they will constantly be watched. I don’t believe anything towards Joost was done maliciously and I don’t believe something like this needed to need to be escalated to the police. As for S10 and her getting attention from staff. Of course, like I said, all eyes are on them. I’m not saying it’s an easy process but that’s just the situation you put yourself in as artists. Naturally I can’t say nothing happened that went too far but what S10 described didn’t seem like anything out of the ordinary. It’s true that netherlands is particularly strict on things like this (I’m Dutch myself) but I find that’s more an issue on our part that on Italy or Sweden.
I also dont believe in malice intent from anyone. Neither the EBU, SVT or any others in the organisation would benefit from it. I think this event has gotten so enormous, it's impossible to manage everything behind-the-scenes on a micro level. You can't expect all those hundreds op people involved knowing the specific wishes of any of the 37 delegations. Same with the flags, so many misunderstandings. All the effort would go into making those 9 hours of tv, and what ends up on screen. Whatever went wrong is probably caused by miscommunication and chaos.
@@Eurovision-OLD Exactly. And the artist should be prepared for this. Joist clearly wasn’t and it ended up going wrong enough to involve the police. There is absolutely no shame in not being able to cope in a situation like this, but perhaps if you can’t cope you shouldn’t put yourself in the situation.
@@cliffarroyo9554 That's again suggesting malice intent, and I'm not buying that, as it's not benificial to ANYONE involved. Sorry if I don't agree with all the nonsense the fandom has spread over the last few months, but when you think about it, most of that simple doesn't make any sense to any person with a reasonable capabiity of reasoning. Things go wrong because of complexity, they always do. I know it sounds a lot less sensational, but other things just don't make sense.
Hahaha is this some sort of a joke? These guys want the attention. They enroll for this. Then tbry think they're "divas" and "want to be alone"? Give me a break. It's obvious they will be filmed from every angle 24/7 during the period they are involved in this.
@@tonylopez-berardinelli4689 I actually rather wonder why Israel was even allowed to participate this year. They're actively acting out a genocide and yet the world has to pretend nothing like that is happening at all!? It's time Israel will be held more accountable - maybe their delegation will pipe down and won't be as arrogant and full of bullies next year!
His whole behaviour was childish. From what I heard he was also acting partially like a Megastar backstage which rubbed a couple of people from the staff the wrong way. Then he verbally attacked the camerawoman while going after her camera, calling her names and making inappropriate gestures even she was allowed to film? Well no wonder he got DQued. The thing with the flag or t-shirt over his head had nothing to do with israel though, he had it on his even when Marina that was interviewed first over his head already and he kept making noises or saying things during the interviews of the others aswell.
Your heresay about the superstar thing isn't good enough proof. It's also why people thought Joost assaulted the woman physically (or worse) until the EBU statement was made. Until the case gets to court, I can not assess a good judgment, and so shouldn't you.
No she wasn't, there was an agreement with EBU not to film Joost when he exited the stage as AVROTROS have repeatedly stated. But EBU believe rules are for others to follow, not them.
Why are you lying ? All he did was removing a camera away from his face after being harassed several times from that camera woman . From what we heard , Israel have been harassing artists, delegations and press yet the never faced consequence while joost got disqualified for refusing to be
Every artist at Eurovision has three minutes to showcase their talent. Every artist at Eurovision also spends six months of their life, building up to this one moment. They need respect, they need personal space too
Bollocks
just for doing something you want to do, and put some time in it - is not something to respect. That is the minumum you should do if you want something. Thats it.
@@NearioNL Got it, we shouldn't respect you for what you do. For everyone else in the world, working to achieve something deserves respect. Being a little troll on the internet doesn't.
They ( famous people) deserve respect. However, there are people who never ever get any respect. 💔😔 A worthless person like me just gets bullying. Famous people can always solve things, they can hire lawyers etc.
Joost is also neurodivergent and therefore it was important to AVROTROS that he was protected. That is why these boundaries and agreement was put into place with the EBU before his performance. He is known to get overwhelmed when he is emotional and needs a few moments to collect himself afterwards. Although this doesn't justify anything, it does explain why he reacted the way he did and why this agreement was made in the first place - to protect himself and others around him. He apologised straight after many times, showing what happened was not intentional.
Actually, medical diagnosis can be a legal justification for behaviour, in certain circumstances. Even under Swedish law.
You say "if he's found guilty, he's [...] going to face the consequences" 6:17
The problem is, he has faced the consequences before he's found guilty. He isn't even tried yet. A basic law in probably all of Europe is: you're innocent until proven guilty, but the EBU has crushed even such a basic principle. If Joost is found "not guilty", how are they going to make up for it? Do the complete event over? Turn back time? It was a stupid decision. It's also a slap in the face of all other contestants, for they will never know if they truly earned the spot they got, seeing that Joost's song was the most played song on Spotify for instance. The EBU has disgraced the contest and they should face the consequences.
That's how all me-too cases work today, kill a career and let a judge prove something happened after the fact. In both cases one side takes all the blame even if there isn't any and the other side has no risks what so ever. It's a pretty sick movement that exist only to bring men down and give women a false sense of worth which in the end serves nobody.
You said if guilty Joost will have to face the concequences i agreee that's the way it should be! It might be forbidden to make any unwanted move towards employers or even break swedish law. But by removing Joost his team and the entire Dutch nation that supported him was already judged prosecuted and sentenced before truth finding..
Guilty of what he didnt even touch the woman its this new woke bs
Interesting, but why do you brush aside a possible connexion between what Joost said during the press conference and his disqualification? As a neurodivergent person, I can tell you that every single one of our actions or remarks, because they are unpredictable and embarrassing (his was in this case just a question, and the hiding under the flag thing - all of this seems quite relatable to me but it is only the tip of the iceberg) piss off so many top brass who think themselves beyond any reproach or question that they frequently take every opportunity they have to get rid of us. The psychological factor is important too.
What I also mean is that a personality like Joost could clearly have made a live political statement. The guy is just honest and doesn't care about other people's opinions - hence his question in the press conference. That would explain the disqualification (because honestly, considering the elements we have, the worst that could have happened is him pushing away a camera, and making it fall and break, and even in that case the sanction is completely disproportionate: depriving an entire country of its candidate for such a petty case !!)
If there is a connection, again I would say it's to the atmosphere and not the incident. Also according to the sequence of events, the altercation happened before the press conference. When people were in the dark about what the cause was, they had speculated that it was because of Joost's interjection that he had been prevented from rehearsing. That ended up being false.
You could suggest that his behaviour in the press conference had negatively affected his image with the members of the Reference Group, making them more inclined to disqualify him. But that would be inferring something that might not be necessary. The incident in isolation was substantial enough that some action needed to be taken. The disagreement between AVROTROS and the EBU is whether or not is was appropriate to removed the Netherlands from the competition altogether without considering alternatives.
@@stu_makes_vids @blidgi The incident was more an Indicator on the whole problem, neurodivergent people often experience that earlier than neurotypicals because of more sensitivity. The difference being Joost needed that time and the other artist would of wanted more time in between to proces the madness surrounding the experience. And frankly treated like they were a person with emotions, being human not just a product.
I dont think his supposed critique of Israel was the cause. I wasn't even critique.
The neuro divergent behavior in extrema made him a liability; highly popular act in line before the israeli act. What if he would have made a remark re gaza at the end of his set in the final. The arena might have gone into riots.
I don't think he would have done that; I can't rule out the organization considered that a big problem, they were under very high pressure possible used an otherwise minor incident to solve that.
Hiding under a flag had nothing to do with the Jewish singer or her team, Look up Joost Florida 2009 and then you realize he has been doing this hiding like since he became an artist. He is emotional when talking about his diseased parents till the point of breaking. So after songs where his parents are adressed he always hides when camera's or photographers are present. He hates being filmed or photographed during that emotional state.
I don't understand, if the problem was associated that she was filming, then there is clear film of what happened. Why would they not release any of that and let us see what exactly happened?
Because it's a legal case now and that is evidence. Usually these kinds of things are embargoed to avoid the influence of public opinion before the court's decision
@@stu_makes_vids Well, by imposing the penalty they influenced the incident far more than the releasing of the video would do. Then you have the issue of being found guilty before any court says you are.
I heard the footage is the reason team Joost had the new demands, after the lawyer saw it. Which indicates there might be something to go off at least
Because the songfestival is not about music, it is about politics.
Poor S10, she thought it must have been a cultural difference that the EBU was so pushy and demanding to her, like it was different in Italy compared to the Netherlands. This seems like something of a "me too" movement among Eurovision artists is going on.
For what reason do they have a need of filming the artists on their entire way to the green room? And if it really was that serious that cameraperson could just have done a complaint to the police on her phone in five minutes. The police interpretate things in a way that benefit them and they were so sure they had enough "evidence" to charge him with. In Sweden you're unfortunately punished for protecting your boundraries, your property especially after metoo. If the dutch delegation intended to solve it with her, it could have been done with just like that. It's on her for not taking that peace-offer. This is disproportionate and really a waste of taxmoney. Even if she didn't knew about any agreements she should have just had listen, that's it.
But after all; Joost is now the most famous participant ever, and his "Europapa" is a big hit world wide. As Johan Cruijf once mentioned; 'Elk nadeel heb zijn voordeel.'
I don't think the controversy lead to more streaming of Europapa. It's just a really good Eurovision song! And if he would've performed I think it would've been streamed even more than it already does!
@@MartijnPennings He is even sampling "Overthinking It" 's end conclusion from the comparison video they did of Olly and Joost, in his new song Luchtballon
I guess the likes of ABBA, Celine Dion l, Måneskin & Loreen to name a few have never existed then. If Joost is suddenly the “most famous participant ever”
This years Eurovision was a total disaster. All the artists are constantly being watched and they need respect and personal space. And after a bit of theorizing I do believe Isreal was intentionally behind his disqualification, especially after watching how the Isrealian team was constantly harassing artists that challenged Eden. Joost, Bambie Thug, Nemo and a few other artists that voiced their opinion in some way was basically targeted by the isreali team. When it comes to what actually happened back stage: I am a firm believer that Joost had no malicious intent towards the camerawoman, she did not respect his boundaries and to be disqualified over standing up for himself is such a drastic thing to do. Its sad to see how his dream got crushed in this way, especially when Europapa was dedicated to his dead parents and him being very emotional after his performance. Allthough we have to take everything with a grain of salt unless Avrotros og Joost himself makes a statement. Both fans and "haters" are quick to spread misinformation about this whole situation.
What right has any of these "artists" got to single out an individual to explain a countries actions?
I thought collective punishment was bad?
Would any German artist be asked to address Hitler?
A Chinese the Uyghurs?
Isn't a group attacking an individual bullying?
And so on.......
If he doesn't want attention he shouldn't be in the attention seeking business.
@@davidsoulsby1102 You’re comparing someone that supports their country doing genocide to actual war criminals. If Eden was israeli and pro palestine she wouldnt have been treated the same from the other artists. I dont even think she wouldve participated at all for palestine’s sake.
I'm not 'in' Eurovision, but I couldn't escape the news. You can't even write the name of a country in the right way. You really are thinking Jews are controlling the world. I feel sorry for you.
The main sponsor of the event was the Israeli company Moroccanoil. I guess that could have influenced the EBU decisions.
@@DecibelDr definitally
Really, all the other participating countries should have stood in and stopped the disqualification with the threat all walking. That is what solidarity looks like.
Are you serious ? I am Dutch, and so ashamed about that jerk. Sure camera's can be annoying, but you do not deal with it as a peasant.
The way how he and others treated the Israeli singer was sick and Pathetic
@@monicacarolina6480 Joost may be a jerk, I don’t know. But he was judged and punished with disqualification without any transparent process. As an observer, this looks to me like a miscarriage of justice, and an inversion of due process. And for this alone, everyone needs to stand by him, because it places everyone else at risk of summary judgement. Injustice must be opposed for all our rights to be preserved.
@@monicacarolina6480 yeah, there are a few rotten apples in the Netherlands who can't help but hate on the guy. Most however seem to understand the situation a bit better and consider both sides of the argument and are willing to have some patience as to what is going on. Just believing one side and dismissing the other completely shows more about your character then it does about Joost.
@@monicacarolina6480Was it a crime asking that question?😂smh
Thanks for exposing your thoughts based on facts, impartially and in detail. It would be interesting in your next video that includes the state-funding voting, to also present in how many languages Eden spoke so as to attract votes from other countries (using AI short videos). As far as I know, she spoke greek, not knowing a single word of it, I suppose.
A similar - though less - advertisement was done back in 2019 when Netta performed for Israel. However, this total 'ad thing' goes in contrast to the equal handling of the songs, which brings inequalities in their winning chances and destroys the sense of a fair contest, when some countries choose to advertise their songs, while some others not.
And the winner with 0 points is... Joost Klein!
As a previous Eurovision multiple participant (over a span of 35 years) Eurovision has always been a celebration between artists, press, fans closely monitored by EBU who usually protects the organizing broadcaster/production. What happened this year was beyond belief. BUT what every participant should know is the huge amount of attention they will receive and endless exposure to media as well as various other obligations. It is a fine balancing act between PR, rehearsing and performing at the top of one’s game. Every artist should be prepared for this, both physically and mentally. Just saying.l It’s not an easy task, especially without the proper support team around you. I truly hope that such unprecedented nonsense and controversy will never happen again. OH, and no more double standards from the “untouchables” at EBU
Joost’s laywer has seen even the initial evidence of this case and allegedly believes that he could be acquitted. However: As someone who has followed Joost since December and witnessed all of his pre season promotional campaign: If you really want to nitpick: “WHY NOT” was not Joost’s first indirect to direct challenge of the EBU / Eurovision.
Over the entire reason, he has kept trying finding reasons to challenge their promotional content, insert pro-peace anti-war political messages into their promos (the same kind of messages artists were censored and punished for during the Grand Final disaster as they lost any and all control with their own bodily autonomy) with him wearing activist shirts, he has name dropped the EBU before in a negative yet joking light without realizing the weight of his words, he removed and unpinned from view his collaborated Eurovision Instagram stuff that he had pinned, he posted next to nothing irl about anything related to Eurovision, he made some promotional videos become embarrassing and laughed about it, he supported his colleague’s post critiquing Eurovision back in March…
I truly believe that if you want to search for possible other reasons as to why they possibly unfairly and borderline even illegally, harshened “it” to the point of disqualification, the evidence is there, but in small tidbits.
It did not start at “WHY NOT”.
He challenged them and possibly provoked them a tiny little bit for months.
WHY NOT was the first public televised moment where things became very clear.
And curiously: I did an Instagram marketing analysis on how often artists were promoted, and Joost, despite being consistently believed to be in top 5 most popular and betted on Artist, was the THIRD LEAST posted during the entire season all this time.
Personally, about this incident thing, it speaks volumes that his lawyer thinks he could get all charges dropped in the court of law for a police investigation that was lacking of core witnesses present at the scene according to the latest updates from Swedish legal system. An EIO (European Investigation Order) has been issued and its now up to The Netherlands to investigate and interview the key witnesses that were missing from the incomplete police report and subsequent investigation that two boards at the EBU unanimously based their decision to disqualify on. All of this time we have had at least 2 of Joost’s eye witnesses neglected and ignored.
I also read that behind Joost stands again not only AVROTROS, but also the EBU member NOS. I didn’t know that was how it worked the first time around.
AVROTROS lost 300 thousand Euros in advertising money on the Grand Final night because millions of Dutch households, possibly 2-3 million more than usual, boycotted the final. And yet, still they stand by him and even expand their stance, calling the disqualification not only out of proportion, but also unnecessary.
300 thousand euros is an enormous amount, I got it to 2 million SEK at the time of conversion.
Unless AVROTROS are on a mission to destroy their reputation domestically and internationally forever, financial gain is not a factor in their stance.
Combined with his lawyer’s statement, I find it very telling.
But it is quite depressing for AVROTROS to have lost such a gigantic amount for something that they have claim repeatedly was not only out of proportion, but also unnecessary.
If Joost’s neglected witnesses are able to support his innocence, EBU and Eurovision may have an uncontrollable scandal on their hands, and the contest may be forever changed from its original state.
Many people would ask for justice for Joost and it’s not clear that what is happening is justice. The deliberate baiting of a neurodivergent person in defiance of the protocols which were agreed to protect him is unethical and also may constitute an offence in many countries-and in fact may constitute in itself an assault-depending on the video which surprisingly has NOT been released . This incident may also indicate a willingness of the Swedish authorities to use Swedish law or for political purposes.The gold standard on this concept is the case of Julian Assange, a journalist currently fighting extradition to the US for offences in connection with the Wikileaks publications.Assange has spent over a decade fighting the Swedish authorities, in connections with cases which many commentators believe to be extremely weak.The fact is that the extradition of Assange to Sweden, where he could be readily extradited to the US and where he may face the death penalty was politically expedient.He is currently fighting extradition in the UK’s highest courts and the outcome is uncertain. It is not beyond credibility that Swedish authorities were prepared to manoeuvre to ensure there was no scandal for the contest if Israel had won which, at that point seemed quite likely -due potentially to the intense campaign conducted on behalf of its participant.
Sorry re autocorrect which translates badly
I know my idea is crazy and way out of the box, but maybe we should only let EUROpean counties compete in the EUROvision songcontest. And to be totally honest I would also prefer going back to the original concept of every country having to sing in their own language.
Moroccanoil!
"It's in the game"!
They wanted to disqualify the Dutch artist. His song was way to populair.
One theory is that the full DQ of Joost came because they wanted some kind of distraction, since there where lots of issues, issues the EBU did not want or could not do anything about. But hopefully there will be some clarity after the case is done but that will take some time
Oh and NL is participating since the beginning 1956, so them considering to pull out does say something. Same with Norway who also did consider to pull out, who are participating since 1960.
There is only 1 in EBU who can disqualify persons. He does not have to say why. The EBU were putting everyone at risk.
So saying that this has nothing to do with "that" incident is stupid.
What risk?
Putting everyone at risk of what, not having to listen to all the bullshit from lunatics who think they matter?
@@davidsoulsby1102 ????? Please do your homework before say anything.
Wheres the video footage of the joost incident?
I want to know it also.
Maybe everybody else was respecting the whole 'no recording' thing?
So, we don't know the real story yet
What happened to your channel? where are new videos?
Waiting for some key announcements. They are in the works 😉
If you annoy an organization, like Joost did at the press conference, you shouldn’t be surprised if they turn against you. Doesn’t mean that they had to do what they did. He was sentenced by EBU before the trial even began. The Swedish police said there was convincing evidence of bad conduct and the process would be a fast one. We still have to see this convincing evidence. It could exist, but we simply don’t know. But I think it isn’t a clear cut case, otherwise it would have been over by now. What should happen besides the police investigation, is an inquiry of the EBU and their decision process in this case. Transparency is the word here if we want to have another ESC next year.
So an organization felt like they where bullied and therefore disqualified him? So far there is no fast process and new info keeps popping up, none in defense of EBU.
I think Israel's interest got him refused. When he asked 'why not' he pointed at Gaza, let alone security risks. But the Israel lobby really didn't want them to be questioned, something that needed to e done very much!
Bullsh. Why didn't the supposed Israeli lobby get Ireland disqualified then, whose representative openly expressed their support to P-stine at the press conference?
And, so what.
When was the eurovision ever about music?
Duh
Can we please stop with this out dated woke show?
If you take part in the contest you are on show 24/7 during your time there. If an artist feels uncomfortable with that then do not enter. An artist cannot "pick and choose" and behave like a diva as Joost did.
Artist? Don’t make me laugh. This has nothing to do with music.😂
I do not think that disqualifying him only because he did not want to be filmed for some moments was fair. But I feel no pain because that song was not my favourite anyway. It's melody was half way good. But I did not get what it was about?
You can find explanations online. A lot of it is about his parents.
Idk if this is controversial but I personally think some people aren’t able to handle all the stress and fuzz that comes with participating in Eurovision. While Joost should not have been filmed if there was an agreement, at such a large event it isn’t surprising not everyone was made aware. Things will happen and as artists it’s important to handle it gracefully, all eyes are on them and they will constantly be watched. I don’t believe anything towards Joost was done maliciously and I don’t believe something like this needed to need to be escalated to the police.
As for S10 and her getting attention from staff. Of course, like I said, all eyes are on them. I’m not saying it’s an easy process but that’s just the situation you put yourself in as artists. Naturally I can’t say nothing happened that went too far but what S10 described didn’t seem like anything out of the ordinary. It’s true that netherlands is particularly strict on things like this (I’m Dutch myself) but I find that’s more an issue on our part that on Italy or Sweden.
I also dont believe in malice intent from anyone. Neither the EBU, SVT or any others in the organisation would benefit from it. I think this event has gotten so enormous, it's impossible to manage everything behind-the-scenes on a micro level. You can't expect all those hundreds op people involved knowing the specific wishes of any of the 37 delegations. Same with the flags, so many misunderstandings. All the effort would go into making those 9 hours of tv, and what ends up on screen. Whatever went wrong is probably caused by miscommunication and chaos.
@@Eurovision-OLD Exactly. And the artist should be prepared for this. Joist clearly wasn’t and it ended up going wrong enough to involve the police. There is absolutely no shame in not being able to cope in a situation like this, but perhaps if you can’t cope you shouldn’t put yourself in the situation.
@@Eurovision-OLD If you believe the open secret part of who was accusing him.... it was done 100% on purpose and in order to trigger a reaction.
@@cliffarroyo9554 That's again suggesting malice intent, and I'm not buying that, as it's not benificial to ANYONE involved. Sorry if I don't agree with all the nonsense the fandom has spread over the last few months, but when you think about it, most of that simple doesn't make any sense to any person with a reasonable capabiity of reasoning. Things go wrong because of complexity, they always do. I know it sounds a lot less sensational, but other things just don't make sense.
@@icyflame716 You seem to be one of they few reasonable people here ;)
Hahaha is this some sort of a joke? These guys want the attention. They enroll for this. Then tbry think they're "divas" and "want to be alone"? Give me a break. It's obvious they will be filmed from every angle 24/7 during the period they are involved in this.
LOL Did you really need to talk for nearly 8 minutes and give examples from 2016 just to say you wanted Israel out of the competition? LOL
Did you really watch the video, it was about the stress placed on performers in Eurovision
@@winniefu6421at 6:25 he starts blaming Israel for what happened. His comment alludes as if Israel hadn't participated, nothing would had happened
@@tonylopez-berardinelli4689 I actually rather wonder why Israel was even allowed to participate this year. They're actively acting out a genocide and yet the world has to pretend nothing like that is happening at all!? It's time Israel will be held more accountable - maybe their delegation will pipe down and won't be as arrogant and full of bullies next year!
So they get to harass people behind the scenes and suffer no consequences?
His whole behaviour was childish.
From what I heard he was also acting partially like a Megastar backstage which rubbed a couple of people from the staff the wrong way.
Then he verbally attacked the camerawoman while going after her camera, calling her names and making inappropriate gestures even she was allowed to film?
Well no wonder he got DQued.
The thing with the flag or t-shirt over his head had nothing to do with israel though, he had it on his even when Marina that was interviewed first over his head already and he kept making noises or saying things during the interviews of the others aswell.
Your heresay about the superstar thing isn't good enough proof. It's also why people thought Joost assaulted the woman physically (or worse) until the EBU statement was made.
Until the case gets to court, I can not assess a good judgment, and so shouldn't you.
No she wasn't, there was an agreement with EBU not to film Joost when he exited the stage as AVROTROS have repeatedly stated. But EBU believe rules are for others to follow, not them.
Why are you lying ? All he did was removing a camera away from his face after being harassed several times from that camera woman . From what we heard , Israel have been harassing artists, delegations and press yet the never faced consequence while joost got disqualified for refusing to be
@fm95master you are actually dumb
Got any reliable sources to back up those statements? If not, they're just baseless rumours.