Music Eurovision 2024
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
To me, the Croatian song felt like a bit of a Frankenstein's monster. Like, it was made up of all these bits and bobs I've heard and seen before, all cobbled together into a song or performance tailor-made for Eurovision. It just felt way too manufactured. On the other hand, the Swiss song seemed more focused and a lot tighter, sounded like it all fit together better. But hey, that's just my two cents - I'm hardly an expert on these things. If I'm honest, both songs and Eurovision as a whole are an insult to music.
What cracked me up though, was that the "jury" from Croatia didn't give any points to Switzerland, but the Swiss gave Croatia 8 or 10 points.
Why?
I mean, story is basically the same.
@Amir fyi.
This reply explains the issue.
"Let me explain to people that are confused with the concept of national broadcaster funded by public money vs government funding this.
National broadcaster funding this is okay, because that money is already allocated to sponsoring, marketing and airing the Eurovision and the artist. That money would be spent regardless.
A government function marketing this means that money was allocated to advertising, hiring someone to create the ad, etc. This money is not allocated for the premise of broadcasting (taking away from other government funded activities), and it is influenced by the government directly. Like, they made a conscious choice to attempt and influence voting.
This is where the difference lies and this is why this is problematic, and 100% against ESC rules."
Right thing to do would be to ban Israel for a few years.
Fair enough.
I'm pretty sure I've about such voting campaigns in the past, no doubt coming from Israel as well. I've no idea in what way and through who they paid for it. With the National broadcastor being funded by public money and through the government anyway, using the Government Advertising Agency never sounded unusual to me as I believe it's been responsible for all sorts of campaigns over the years, but if it's against the rules, it's against the rules.
Ultimately, it's just a song contest. Israel may have tilted the televoting to its favour, but it probably even things out a little as the juries might have been politically motivated against Israel (I heard at least one Norwegian judge admitted to it). And eventually, fifth place was probably the right result.
If it's just a song contest, why so much underhand effort to promote their song?
Propaganda has always been important in any conflict.They can point to the support they have all over Europe when it's total bollox. It gives legitimacy to the disgraceful actions of govts who refuse to condemn a clear genocide and those who are actively funding it.
I have to say Israelis always had a lot of interest in the Eurovision, more than it warrants, probably because of this hunger to showcase our success worldwide.
It's the same with Euroleague basketball. If Maccabi Tel Aviv reaches the final four, you can bet that it will take a lot more supporters there than the other three teams.
If it started and ended with the rule breaking perhaps. But it hasn't. It's been textbook culture washing. The unified message the next day wasn't about coming fifth, it was "Look at the televote, Europe supports us". The singer herself actually melted away from the message of Europe supporting the country.
Well, the singer was just about the most innocent party here, so if she came out of it with a good feeling - good for her.
How does that relate to what I wrote?
And she's not innocent. She represented Israel because the other pathways she'd been trying to get famous through dried up. She actually tried to represent Russia at the junior Eurovision in the past and also did performances in occupied Crimea. She's an opportunist and a willing participant in all of this.
She's also been posting about how she's going to go entertain soldiers, and that she can't wait to serve in the IDF.
Yes. So she is entirely on board with the culture washing aspect.
She was in the Eurovision because she won a reality show. Sure, she wanted to get famous - like just about any person who tried to be in the contest.
You really need to get a grip. Not everything related to Israel is evil. It's not black and white.
Army service is mandatory, and Israeli society does not tend to look positively on people who refuse that - let alone in a time or war. I don't know what she's thinking - but she's saying the only thing she can.
As for entertaining soldiers, it's been a regular thing for singers and entertainers for decades. Nothing to see here.
Citation needed.
I've only been to one f4 with maccabi (2011) and it certainly wasn't the case.
Well, at least that's what it looks like - and what we hear - from here.
Obviously there's a limit due to ticket allocation, but I can definitely say there's a mad rush for those.
And yet those are choices she made. There are people who choose otherwise.
It's very easy to live elsewhere and just expect someone in Israel to go against the flow and suffer the potential consequences.
And maybe I could understand the criticism if she was going to be picking up a gun and fighting, but her army career will probably consist of more singing.
Does that really reflect badly on her?
And BTW, I did my three-year army service quite a few years back. Does that reflect badly on me?
I don't accept the argument that she had to do what she did or she would suffer consequences. It's not the same as you doing your service, as the consequences for you refusing would have been imprisonment. I am not asking her to refuse service. I am asking her not to actively promote it in the way she's doing. If that has some consequences on her future career as an artist, then honestly I don't care. Those aren't actual consequences. People are going to jail for their morals - those are consequences.
Do you realise that you almost never actually address the actual content of my posts when you reply to them?
It's like you're having a conversation with yourself a lot of the time. You just ignore 90% of what I write.
She was living elsewhere - Russia. She tried to compete for them in junior Eurovision. Her being in Israel is a choice and everything that follows from that is also a choice.
Maybe it's because I simply do not understand what it is you're on about and why you're making such a big deal of it.
Yes, she is innocent. She's just a singer. One who wants to succeed and be famous like so many others. I don't know why she came back to Israel from Russia a couple of years ago, but that's hardly a crime - even if it was for her career, which I don't know. You're making a 20 year old sound like some sort of evil person with a masterplan.
She's a willing participant in what? Covering Israeli crimes in Gaza? Winning votes illegaly? That's just nonsense. She won a competition, she was sent to the Eurovision, she performed, she did some basic PR work and said the sort of things most Israeli representatives would say.
Now I understand that anything that comes out of Israel right now looks bad to you and maybe you expected her to refuse to represent Israel (so someone else would have anyway) or refuse to say any positive word about her country while in Sweden if not turn against it completely... But that's beyond utopian.
There's a very simple antidote to not understanding.
Actually engage with the information we share with you. We've gone to the trouble of collecting factual sources for you.
When you don't engage with these, you end up just talking to yourself with these replies to points that noone is raising.
The questions you're asking here we've actually already answered.
Also, the last paragraph... Just casting pure aspersions. Total inventions of your own mind that noone has even remotely said.
Aaaaah, that. Sorry, we do.
To be fair, witches have caused far less damage to Ireland than priests have over the years.
OK. Just because you gave your answers doesn't make them correct or logical.
No, that's exactly the situation. You're taking normal situations that no one cared about or thought about twice in previous years & Eurovisions, with Israeli entries as well, and turn then into major issues now.
No need to continue this.
So then dispute them with your own sources, not just your feelings and opinions.
We've clearly demonstrated with evidence that it's NOT normal at all and it breaks the rules of Eurovision.
The EBU have made a huge deal of having zero tolerance to rule breaking and that's why people are so annoyed at this whole situation.
And it's not us making a huge deal out of this. Multiple national broadcasters from all over Europe have filed official complaints.
And I'd repeat again. None of us said they things you're saying we said. You're just making shit up.
Completely agree when it's a loop of your feelings versus facts.
The Wokes finally got their hands on Eurovision, which used to be such a traditional, austere event.
Joost Klein's case has been dropped by the Swedish prosecution: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cdjwdl2e73wo.
There's a bit more detail in a Dutch newspaper article I read. So he (roughly?) pushed away a camera because he thought he was supposed not to be filmed in that particular area. That's all, and so it does seem like the camera woman blew this up rather unnecessarily.
What a mess. I would have loved to know how his song would have done in the finals.
There's a bit more detail in a Dutch newspaper article I read. So he (roughly?) pushed away a camera because he thought he was supposed not to be filmed in that particular area. That's all, and so it does seem like the camera woman blew this up rather unnecessarily.
What a mess. I would have loved to know how his song would have done in the finals.
It was clear as day this was going to be dropped. Absolute farce. I think he would have won it or come extremely close to doing so. There has to be repercussions of some kind for this.
What the feck was the point in disqualifying him?
I don't think so. Joost's singing was kinda poor in the semis and there is nothing techincal about the song, so he wouldn't have had a lot of jury points. He probably wouldn't have taken any away from Nemo (Switzerland). For the audience vote, it's a fun song like Baby Lasagna's (Croatia), so I think it would have changed scores of that sort of songs rather than, again, Nemo. So I think Nemo would have won either way, but Joost might well have made the top 5.
Per that BBC story, Eurovision/EBU actually still stand behind that decision, as they feel they had to take the staff member's claim seriously. To an extent, that's true of course; artists shouldn't just be able to get away with anything. But I feel they could have done a bit more due diligence in talking to witnesses, which likely would have led to a different conclusion.
That’s the problem right there then. Can’t have a bloke being aggressive to a female in a public place, more so in her place of work. Fair enough really.
That's true also.