image description: STAND FOR THE FLAG (soldier saluting in front of enby flag) AND KNEEL FOR THE CROSS (soldier kneeling in front of swiss flag)
image description: STAND FOR THE FLAG (soldier saluting in front of enby flag) AND KNEEL FOR THE CROSS (soldier kneeling in front of swiss flag)
This is the first time Joost got to do such a big event, and then he got filmed without his consent, indicating such multiple times. This happened while he was under time pressure, so he made a “threatening movement” towards the woman holding the camera. I feel like a punishment other than disqualification would’ve been better, this felt disproportionate.
Is there any publicly released footage of the incident? I only read about it in the news and if the reaction is justified imo depends on what he exactly did to her.
Taking part in such an event (sadly) often leads to a certain loss of privacy which one should be aware of. On the other hand pointing the camera on him even after him indicating he doesn’t want to requires a certain amount of ignorance.
But then again, I cannot really judge the situation and need to leave that to the investigators.
Nope, the Dutch broadcaster Avrotros said what happened as described above, the EBU says the story from the photographer or whatever is different, but has failed to tell us what that difference actually is
Mhm I see. It’s just a really shitty situation and that it happened so shortly before the main event makes it even worse. Like, if you disqualify him when he didn’t do anything wrong, you face backlash and when he did in fact assault her and you still let him perform, you face backlash too.
I just hope the investigation doesn’t get brushed under the carpet and that we get a better understanding of what actually happened.
So far I’m inclined to believe Joost’s side of the story. Firstly because innocent until proven guilty. Secondly, because the other side doesn’t tell its side of the story at all.
I think the EBU should have operated under the innocent until proven guilty assumption, especially since they now have opened a way to get rid of competition, just accuse them of assault shortly before the main event.
Did I miss anything, or wasn’t Joost’s performance the last contribution left, that was at least partly on politics?
(Leaving aside whatever the israeli song was about)
Croatia sang about urbanisation and the decline of the countryside.
Israel was 100% a political show no elaboration needed there.
Finland sang about no rules - anarchism.
Serbia was anti war, which is also a political position.
Then there’s all the feminist and queer themes like with Ukraine, Spain and Switzerland. Arguably not political, but then again neither should be Palestinians deserving human rights.
And these are just what comes to mind off the top of my head.
Estonia just came into my mind, as it supposedly is about police harassment of homeless people.
I somehow didn’t put gender identity, female- and self-empowerment into the drawer politics, though it definitely is.
They made it sound like he assaulted someone ar first but it does seem to have been just a (offensive) gesture after repeatedly requesting they leave him alone.
Disproportionate is an understatement especially considering the already tense climate.
Song would have gotten good points for sure aswell.
He got the second place (182 out of 216 possible points, that’s an insanely good result, even better than Croatia in their semi-final) in the semi-final so he would have been very likely top 5.
I don’t think so considering Windows95man did poorly
He got the second place (182 out of 216 possible points, that’s an insanely good result, even better than Croatia in their semi-final) in the semi-final so he would have been very likely top 5. Windows95man did pretty bad in his semi-final.
I couldn’t tell myself but my wife said the other singer on stage (Henri) sung lots of false notes.
The assault part was complete speculation from a news website iirc.