Eurovision Thread: Ö, ö, malm ö
- Thread starter McElroy
- Start date
I can't help but notice the show didn't start with an apology for conspiring to ruin one of the contestants. Not that I expected that but it seems they are doing the show pretending none of it has happened. And with the Dutch tv spinelessly giving up their voice I fear they'll bury the scandal and get away with it.
The EBU is a union of public service broadcasters, and public sector broadcasters are nothing if not the quasi-official voices of their governments.
Those officials all know they're going to get much further sucking up to the political preferences of European governments than they will by delivering a satisfying and uncontroversial music contest for the European people.
The Netherlands are a relatively significant European governments though. Perhaps not strictly one of the big boys but certainly the biggest of the small boys. Even without taking public opinions into account its still a significant snub to an entire country. Especially now we know he got eliminated for lightly touching a camera of some lady who broke all agreements and wasn't even supposed to be there.
Joost should have just walked away towards the green room and not interact with the camera crew. Best way to de-escalate a situation is by removing yourself from it, but he messed up by engaging.
Big sad, big cry, time to move on.
And I'm saying that as someone who would have liked to see him perform.
Big sad, big cry, time to move on.
And I'm saying that as someone who would have liked to see him perform.
I mean its hard to move on when heads haven't rolled and apologized haven't been made. We'd be doormats if we just attended next year as if they hadn't betrayed and slandered us.
Maybe so, but a disqualification without clear and serious reason is also disproportionate.
People have to be allowed some room to make mistakes, otherwise this world will be a ultra-punitive hellhole where we all routinely receive heavy punishment for not choosing the best response to a situation.
Didn't watch any of the lead-ups, but got invited to a finals party so went to that (though we turned off when Israel was on and some of us donated to aid charities to sooth our consciences).
Switzerland & Ireland were the best. Ireland also snuck a blink-and-you'll-miss-it pro-Palestine nod in there past the censors.
Switzerland & Ireland were the best. Ireland also snuck a blink-and-you'll-miss-it pro-Palestine nod in there past the censors.
NB.
Despite Nemo's pronouns, the performance is still a dude in a skirt. All this pronoun metagaming was cringe when it was taken up and it's cringe now.
Sure, Nemo doesn't wear the skirt in the classic sense of a man wearing women's clothes, because he isn't into gendered clothing like that, but it is what it is.
What's probably more cringe is using a painfully online term like 'pronoun metagaming' to describe a phenomenon that's millenia old at least. Eurovision probably isn't the right show for you if you're dismissive towards anyone who doesn't fit the rigid gender binary and archaic sexual determinism model.
Pretty shameful Israel got top point from the Netherlands after their camera woman sabotaged us.
Because of the way that the voting system works, it's fairly easy for a relatively small number of people to launch a country up the rankings. If there are 25 countries in the final, this means each gets an average of 4% of the votes. It's likely around just 10-20% of the votes is regularly enough for douze points, and a mere 5% will ensure a place on the points tally.
This therefore gives you an idea how easy it may be for a relatively small number of campaigners to rocket an act up the points tally. Israel to be fair did provide a song which - absent of any controversy - was capable of being in the top half, so would have needed even less shall we say "ideological" support.