Concerns Over AI Postcards at Junior Eurovision
by James Stephenson
Additional reporting by Gabe Milne, Sem-Anne van Dijk, Daniel Stridh and GJ Kooijman
The use of generative AI in the postcards of this year’s Junior Eurovision Song Contest in Madrid has come under scrutiny. At the contest, which was held in Spain on 16 November 2024, the show’s postcards intercut real footage of the competing artists, all between the ages of 9 and 14, with AI-generated sections of the performers.
However, questions have emerged over why AI was used in this year’s postcards, who was responsible for creating them, and whether the data captured of the child performers was rendered locally or via the cloud.
If the postcards were rendered locally, the data captured would be stored on a local machine controlled by the creators. But if the postcards were rendered using a cloud-based AI model, the data used to create the AI clips could then be used as training for the model, giving any of its users the ability to create images trained on children.
This would mean that data captured from minors would be openly accessible, raising ethical questions about how the data was handled and the safeguarding of the performers. Additionally, there is no known evidence that the performers, nor their families, had given explicit consent for their image or likenesses to be used to create AI imagery.
EBU Explanation Cast Into Doubt
As of Monday 18 November,, the European Broadcasting Union (EBU), the organisers of Junior Eurovision, say that the postcards were rendered locally:
“To create the AI imagery seen in the postcard’s for this year’s event, pictures of the artists were shared by delegations and were then stored locally on the machines of the company commissioned to make them and never in a cloud.”
They further elaborated in a statement sent to Eurovision journalist Matthew Joyce that the company, who is not named, used AI softwares called Runway and Stable Diffusion to create the postcards.
“All the data developed to train the AI models was done locally using software called Stable Diffusion.
Animations were then created on local machines in software called Runway by using the avatars created in Stable Diffusion, not the original images of the artists.”
On the surface, the EBU’s statement appears to be a credible explanation of the production process. However, technical experts and sources close to the contest’s production dispute the EBU’s claims.
To understand why, we need to introduce you to a different AI software: Luma. Luma is a company which uses a cloud-based AI model that does not have the functionality to run on local machines. That means any imagery created in Luma is created in the cloud, necessitating the uploading of data.
And, although the EBU’s statement does not name Luma, this shot from the broadcast postcard of The Netherlands’ act, Stay Tuned, clearly shows Luma’s watermark in the top right corner. This was first discovered and reported by Daniel Stridh.
The Luma watermark does not appear in any other part of Junior Eurovision’s production. However, this watermark would only be displayed if using the free version of Luma’s “Dream Machine” model.
Luma’s terms and conditions, available on their website, make it clear that anybody who uses Luma gives them permission to use any data inputted into its software to "create, test, improve, train, or otherwise develop the artificial intelligence or machine learning models".
That means, if Luma’s AI model was used to create any of the postcards at Junior Eurovision 2024, any images that the delegations provided of the performers would have been inputted into Luma’s AI model, making that data accessible to anybody using the software.
Along with the evidence that the Junior Eurovision postcards utilised Luma, sources say that the EBU’s explanation of how the postcard creators used Runway is not technically possible.
This is because the Runway software, which the EBU says has been used locally, cannot be run locally. That’s at least according to the software’s developers, who clarify in the security and privacy standards on their own website that Runway is “a cloud-based browser service”.
In this guide, Runway specifies that the media uploaded to its system is secure and cannot be accessed or extracted by third parties:
“If you’re editing videos for your own clients through a personally-owned Standard, Pro, or Unlimited Plan, our SOC 2 compliance guarantees that all uploaded media is not accessible or extractable by unauthorized team members and/or third parties.
For those on an Enterprise Plan, this compliance still applies, but any additional requested, discussed, or amended plan-based security details (especially involving media processed on the Runway platform for said clients) are specifically outlined in your original enterprise contract.”
But while this guide makes it clear that the assets you create using Runway are secure, it doesn’t provide any information about additional security for the data you upload into the cloud-based Runway software to create the assets themselves.
Furthermore, according to comments from users on Reddit, the functionality to use Runway on a local machine had been removed over a year ago by the software’s developers.
“In the early versions of Runway you could use your own CPU or GPU for some of the models. They removed this functionality.”
The EBU’s statement says that the postcard creators used Runway’s software on local machines, using AI avatars created in Stable Diffusion. As a result, the creators could have uploaded the avatars into Runway, and not the images of the child performers themselves. But if that were correct, it would still mean that assets based on the data of minors was uploaded into a generative AI software
And, as evidenced above, at least one shot broadcast at Junior Eurovision is proven to have been created using the entirely cloud-based Luma AI software. The EBU’s statement, then, raises significant questions as to how the postcards could have been created while protecting and safeguarding the competing artists’ data.
Who Was in Charge of The Postcards?
In their statement, the EBU claimed that a third party company was responsible for the creation and production of the AI in the postcards. The company in question is Creative Works London, a UK-based creative studio.
The company’s co-founder and the Executive Creative Director of the postcards, Dan Potter, confirmed that his team had worked on the project in a LinkedIn post. He described their work on the project like this:
“We developed a content package solution that seamlessly wove together film, music, motion graphics, and AI to bring out the concept of 'Let's Bloom' and capture a snapshot of aspiring music performers' character, creativity, and craft.”
The Executive Producer of Junior Eurovision 2024, Ana María Bordas, confirmed that Creative Works London was chosen for the project because they wanted “a company specialising in this type of creation with a lot of experience behind it”.
Creative Works London are credited with creating imagery, through the use of generative AI, for some of the world’s biggest artists, including Guns n’ Roses. In an interview with Decrypt, Potter spoke about his work with the band on the music video for their song “The General”, outlining how CWL integrated Stable Diffusion into their workflow on the project:
Stable Diffusion, unlike Runway and Luma, can be run on local machines. This means that the data used to create the animations in Stable Diffusion would not need to be uploaded to any cloud server.
However, in his post about CWL’s work on Junior Eurovision, Potter does not specify the workflow they used to create the Junior Eurovision postcards. Additionally, there is no evidence that Creative Works London has ever utilised Runway’s AI software in any previous project.
It remains unclear as to how Creative Works London came to be involved in this year’s Junior Eurovision Song Contest. However, the company did have an existing relationship with a member of its production team.
In this post, Potter speaks about another project Creative Works London was part of - the visuals for a tour by German artist Ayliva. It confirms that their work on Ayliva’s tour was done in collaboration with Marvin Dietmann - the Artistic Director of this year’s Junior Eurovision Song Contest.
Dietmann has long been associated with both Junior Eurovision and the main Eurovision Song Contest. An article by fan media website Eurovision Fun claims that Dietmann staged 10 performances at the Eurovision Song Contest 2023 in Liverpool, United Kingdom, showcasing his influence on the production of the show.
As this year’s Artistic Director, Dietmann played a major role in deciding the direction of the show’s production. Sources with knowledge of Junior Eurovision’s production have said that Dietmann had final approval on many elements of the show, demonstrating his influence on the look and feel of the contest overall.
Additionally, in her interview with verTele!, Executive Producer Bordas claimed that the initial idea for the AI postcards came from the Artistic Direction team. As leader of that team, and based on his previous relationship with Creative Works London, it’s clear Dietmann was influential in the creation of the AI postcards.
Postcards Show Clear Errors and Cut Corners
When the postcards for Junior Eurovision were first shown publicly, during the dress rehearsal for the contest on Friday 15 November, they faced negative reaction on social media.
Many users on the social media platform X criticised the use of AI in the postcards, with some suggesting that the use of generative AI in postcards involving children was particularly concerning to them.
However, closer inspection of the postcards used at Junior Eurovision this year reveals several technical errors and shortcuts taken by their creators.
Firstly, it became apparent during the jury show that the postcards and the title cards, showing the key information about the songs, were separate files. This was made clear by an abrupt cut in audio when switching between them on the broadcast, although this issue was resolved in time for the final.
Some of the postcards also contain visual errors or strange imagery. For example, the postcard for the artist who won the contest, Georgia’s Andria Pukharadze, shows him having four fingers in one shot, while Ireland’s entrant’s hair colour is also wrong.
(Andria Pukharadze - Georgia)
(Enya Cox Dempsey - Ireland)
Another example shows that the AI software used in the production created “artefacts” in various areas. These artefacts are created when the machine learning model makes errors in how it represents imagery. For example, the title card of the Albania postcard shows her walking off frame, while the image of the artist appears melted into a plinth behind her.
(Nikol Çabeli - Albania)
Some errors were caught by the postcards’ producers between the jury show and the Grand Final the following day. But the way those errors were hidden often relied on shortcuts.
In this example, broadcast in the jury show, the male member of The Netherlands’ representatives Stay Tuned starts to turn into a blonde girl during the title card. For the Grand Final, this was fixed by shortening the AI section of the title card before they transition into real-life footage. However, the real-life footage has clearly been superimposed over the faulty AI imagery, which is still present behind.
(Stay Tuned - The Netherlands (Dress Rehearsal 2))
(Stay Tuned - The Netherlands (Grand Final))
That means Creative Works London and the Junior Eurovision team were still making edits to the postcards with hours to go until the live show. However, this also means that many other errors, including the ones listed above, were not fixed.
There is also evidence of Creative Works London reusing assets from previous projects at Junior Eurovision. In the full version of the LinkedIn post we showed above, Dan Potter goes on to describe a set piece CWL created for Ayliva’s tour, featuring imagery from the live performance:
This same concept was re-used almost entirely for the opening act of Junior Eurovision 2024, which Potter has confirmed Creative Works London were commissioned to create. During the opening, previous Junior Eurovision winner Zoe Clauzure emerges from a similar structure.
Furthermore, sources close to the production say that the competing delegations at the contest didn’t see the finished postcards until the last possible moment. The first time delegations saw the postcards was when they were used during the first dress rehearsal for the contest, which took place earlier on Friday.
Sources have claimed that multiple delegations immediately made complaints about the postcards once they viewed them, as well as other elements of the show’s production. However, by this point in the production, it was too late for any significant changes to be made.
Delegation sources are also reporting that there were several complaints from delegations because the changes requested after the stand-in rehearsals weren't carried over to the first rehearsals.
AI Also Apparent in Staging Backgrounds
The postcards weren’t the only element of the staging that utilised generative AI, though. Several of the performances at Junior Eurovision also integrated AI into their staging, with many countries having AI-generated assets on the large Unlike the postcards, the individual staging concepts were not worked on by Creative Works London. Instead, each competing country had a choice to make: they could create their own staging or hire a third party to make it for them, or commission their staging from Junior Eurovision’s host broadcaster, RTVE.
At Eurovision, staging a song comes with a price tag. That means the national broadcasters with higher budgets can produce more impressive stagings, while countries with less money available have fewer options.
Italy, whose broadcaster Rai is a member of the “Big Five” at Eurovision, was able to commission Gio Forma, who created the staging for Måneskin’s Eurovision winner “Zitti e Buoni” to create theirs. Many countries, however, opted to commission RTVE to create their backgrounds to cut costs.
Using AI in Eurovision staging can also reduce the cost of the stagings themselves, meaning a lower price tag for less well-off broadcasters. Additionally, the option to use generative AI in backgrounds can create a more even playing field, giving those broadcasters the opportunity to create spectacular visuals without a high budget.
However, many countries found that their staging backgrounds, much like the postcards, contained errors as well. For example, Estonia’s entry “Tanavad” used a background of a New York-like cityscape, but the AI model used to create this included a building that closely resembles one of the towers of the former World Trade Center.
(Estonia - Grand Final)
Even more notable was Poland’s performance, in which singer Dominik Arim was digitally aged from a child to an old man on the LED screen in the space of a few seconds as he sang. This resulted in a strange, surreal visual that dominated the staging.
Generative AI is nothing new for Eurovision, or Junior Eurovision. At last year’s JESC in Nice, France, Armenian entry Yan Girls utilised AI in the music video for their song “Do It My Way”, while the aforementioned RTVE also created AI backgrounds for their own Eurovision entry “Zorra” this year.
But, much like the postcards, the backgrounds were also criticised on social media and showed errors. And, along with other staging elements, the changes requested after the stand-in rehearsals weren't carried over to the first rehearsals.
AI Raises Ethical Concerns for Eurovision
The Junior Eurovision Song Contest is not the first, and will not be the last entertainment programme to attempt to integrate AI into its production.
Since it emerged, generative AI has revolutionised the way digital art can be created. Thanks to accessible, free-to-use tools alongside more advanced AI models, both individual people and creative businesses can use AI to create groundbreaking visuals quickly and cheaply, in some cases replacing the need for traditional artists and graphic designers.
However, there are ethical concerns over how these AI models create this imagery. Most AI models use machine learning, with developers scraping millions of images and videos across the internet to train the AI to create believable images.
And, while AI is expected to shape many aspects of our lives in the future, the technology is little understood by most people. There are hundreds of AI models out there, each working in a different way and integrating differently with other technology.
As a result, it can be easy for companies not to truly appreciate the impact of AI. In the face of this complex web of information, even large multi-national organisations like the EBU may not have the knowledge required to understand the processes and technicalities of the tools they are utilising.
One of the biggest impacts of AI is what the images it creates can represent. Generative AI has been criticised for “beautifying” its subjects, making them appear more in line with traditional Western beauty standards. In the postcards for Junior Eurovision, we found multiple examples of where artists, particularly girls, had been made to appear skinnier and more blonde in the AI footage.
(Enya Cox Dempsey - Ireland)
(Maria Pissarides - Cyprus)
(Stay Tuned - The Netherlands)
The postcards also feature multiple instances of the artists’ ethnicities being changed. Artists such as Italy’s Simone Grande, who has an olive skin complexion, appear in their AI-generated selves as having whiter skin than in real life. On the other hand, North Macedonian artist Aleksej is generated as having darker features than their real-life self in a shot from their postcard:
(Simone Grande - Italy)
(Aleksej (of Ana & Aleksej) - North Macedonia)
There are further instances where young female performers have been unnecessarily altered in their physical appearance to come across more mature in their postcards. Cyprus’s artist, Maria Pissarides, is generated by AI in a shorter item of clothing in the shot below, while the title card of Ireland’s Enya Cox Dempsey emphasises particular features of her body so that it appears more mature.
(Maria Pissarides - Cyprus)
(Enya Cox Dempsey - Ireland)
All of these examples highlight worries that AI can modify its subjects to make them appear “better” than their true selves. In a world where there is increasing pressure and mental health issues derived from body image problems, especially in young people, these postcards raise questions over the example they set for Junior Eurovision’s audience.
More pressingly, these postcards are also using the images of minors, who the organisers of Junior Eurovision have a duty of care towards. As it stands, the European Broadcasting Union, the Junior Eurovision host broadcaster RTVE of Spain, or Creative Works London have not provided any evidence that specific consent was given for these images to be created.
While the statement sent by the EBU on Monday night says that “pictures of the artists were shared by delegations”, it doesn’t specify whether they knew what the pictures were being used for. The EBU has not responded to an email we sent them on Friday before the live show occurred asking, among other questions, whether explicit consent had been given for images of the child performers to be fed into an AI model.
These concerns are why how the AI footage was rendered is important. If the images were rendered using a cloud-based model, without prior consent from artists’ legal guardians and delegations for them to be used specifically for that purpose, the postcard producers and the EBU would face strong questions on the ethics and legality of their actions.
Finally, the decision to integrate AI into the postcards at Junior Eurovision goes against previous comments the EBU has made on AI.
In 2023, Jean-Philip de Tender, Deputy Director General of the European Broadcasting Union, stated in an interview at the Edinburgh TV Festival that the EBU was debating banning generative AI from Eurovision altogether.
During the interview, he said he was “reflecting on how we need this [AI] in the rulebook, that the creativity should come from humans and not from machines.”
The fallout from the postcards at this year’s Junior Eurovision Song Contest has demonstrated the questions that arise when AI is used to augment or enhance entertainment. Now, the EBU must grapple not only with mounting questions about how AI has been used in this instance, but whether they choose to use this technology in the coming years, and how they do so ethically.
EXCLUSIVE: AVROTROS Confirms New Details Around Eurovision 2025
The Dutch national broadcaster, AVROTROS, has confirmed further details of their plans after announcing they will participate at Eurovision 2025 in Basel, Switzerland.
In an interview held today at the broadcaster’s headquarters, AVROTROS’ General Director Taco Zimmermann confirmed that the new Head of Delegation for the Netherlands will be Claudia van der Pas. Van der Pas served as the broadcaster’s Assistant Head of Delegation at Eurovision 2024 in Malmö and Eurovision 2023 in Liverpool.
During our interview, Zimmermann also discussed several other topics, including his experience of the events of Eurovision 2024. The entire 16 minute interview will run tomorrow in Ding-a-Dong the Dutch Eurovision Podcast.
Zimmermann said on Claudia’s appointment:
“She knows the ropes. She has experienced it several times. So that gives confidence. And Claudia has done well for years. And now we have given her the confidence to become the boss herself.”
Van der Pas succeeds Twan van der Nieuwenhuijzen, who left the role following the tumultuous events of Eurovision 2024 in Malmö, Sweden. After the fallout from the disqualification of Joost Klein over a backstage incident with a videographer, the Dutch broadcaster agreed an extension to the participation deadline with contest organisers the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) over concerns about the disqualification and how the contest was being managed.
CHANGES TO BEHIND THE SCENES POLICIES
Among the issues that the Dutch broadcaster raised in talks with the EBU was over backstage filming. We previously revealed that the two sides had clashed over whether arrangements were made to prevent Klein from being filmed behind the scenes, with the EBU denying a written agreement was made while AVROTROS claimed to have evidence of one.
During our interview, AVROTROS confirmed that there will be changes to filming rules at the contest moving forward. While yesterday’s statement confirmed the EBU would be “severely reducing behind-the-scenes filming”, the broadcaster has clarified that artists will no longer be allowed to be filmed in backstage areas and dressing rooms without permission.
A press spokesperson for AVROTROS explained:
“[Filming] is now a lot more restricted and it is also really forbidden for people to just approach artists behind the scenes. That must first go through a Head of Media who then has to give permission. So no one can be unexpectedly confronted with a camera anymore.”
Anyone who wants to film artists behind the scenes - including the EBU themselves - will now have to obtain express permission from the Head of Press/Media of the artists’ respective delegations. This includes embedded media, who travel to the contest as part of the national delegations competing at the contest.
NEW DETAILS ABOUT MALMÖ
The way that the situation in Malmö surrounding Joost’s participation spiralled surprised the entire AVROTROS team. When we asked Zimmermann about his experience of the events that weekend, he said that he and others within AVROTROS were “taken aback” when Joost did not perform his song “Europapa” during the first Grand Final rehearsal on Friday May 10.
“We were there ready for the day to start. I got a cup of coffee and walked around. We wanted to go and see Joost's performance. And he didn't appear on stage. And then we immediately raised the alarm and said, wait a minute, what's going on here? I want to speak to the highest official now...and then it was announced: "Yes, something happened yesterday. We have now taken Joost out.”"
EXCLUSIVE REVEAL: SCRIPT SHOWS EARLY DECISION
We can exclusively reveal that the decision to remove Joost’s performance from the first dress rehearsal had already been made by the EBU more than half an hour before it began, at 12:56 local time. The EBU has not responded to previous requests for comment on why he subsequently took part as normal in the flag parade at the start of this rehearsal.
We have obtained, through multiple sources, a script update sent to national commentators at 12:56 local time on Friday 10 May. The Dress Rehearsal started at 13:30 local time with the Netherlands scheduled to perform their entry at 14:05 local time. The update already displayed the entire Dutch performance sequence as "deleted".
While this change was communicated in the updated document to all delegations 60 minutes before the Netherlands’ scheduled performance slot, it appears that delegations were not told specifically about Joost’s removal. And the high volume of script updates means that it’s plausible this wasn’t widely deducted from the updated script before the rehearsal took place.
Klein himself said that he spent 8 hours backstage on Friday, in an interview with Dutch talk show host Eva Jinek last night before receiving any further update regarding his status in the competition.
NEGOTIATIONS AND RESULTS
Zimmermann detailed how the broadcaster tried to negotiate with the EBU to resolve the situation, asking them to “let him perform at least at the end of the afternoon” as they attempted to find a solution. He expressed regret that this was not possible:
“Of course you saw a huge frustration from us about how that process went. Of course you want to sit down as adults. And we were only given that opportunity to a very limited extent.”
But despite this, Zimmermann says that AVROTROS is very happy with the measures that the EBU has taken to improve the contest. He says that, when it comes to Eurovision, “I actually mainly feel like looking ahead now”, and he wants fans to “focus on the fun” of Eurovision again:
“I would like to say: Let's all enjoy it a little bit again. And put the preconditions and the things around it a little bit into perspective. And especially focus on the joy of the contest. The connection and a damn good song. That's what I would wish for the upcoming Eurovision Song Contest.”
REPORTED BY:
GJ Kooijman
Sem Anne van Dijk
Marco Dreijer
AVROTROS Bevestigt Nieuwe Details voor Eurovisie Songfestival 2025:
Omroep AVROTROS heeft verdere details van haar plannen bevestigd na de aankondiging dat Nederland zal deelnemen aan Eurovision 2025 in Basel, Zwitserland.
In een interview vandaag op het hoofdkantoor van de omroep bevestigde directeur Taco Zimmermann dat Claudia van der Pas het nieuwe delegatiehoofd voor Nederland wordt. Van der Pas was assistent-delegatiehoofd bij Eurovisie 2024 in Malmö en Eurovisie 2023 in Liverpool.
Tijdens ons interview besprak Zimmermann ook verschillende andere onderwerpen, waaronder zijn ervaring met de evenementen van Eurovisie 2024. Het volledige interview van 16 minuten zal morgen te horen zijn in Ding-a-Dong, de Nederlandse Eurovisie Podcast.
Zimmermann over Claudia's benoeming:
“Ze kent het klappen van de zweep. Ze heeft het Songfestival meerdere keren meegemaakt. Dus dat geeft vertrouwen. En Claudia doet het al jaren goed. En nu hebben we haar het vertrouwen gegeven om zelf de baas te worden.”
Van der Pas volgt Twan van der Nieuwenhuijzen op, die de functie neerlegde na de tumultueuze gebeurtenissen tijdens Eurovisie 2024 in Malmö, Zweden. Na de gevolgen van de diskwalificatie van Joost Klein vanwege een backstage-incident met een videograaf, kwam de Nederlandse omroep een verlenging van de deelname-deadline overeen met de organisatoren van de wedstrijd, de European Broadcasting Union (EBU), vanwege zorgen over de diskwalificatie en de manier waarop het festival destijds werd geleid.
VERANDERINGEN IN BACKSTAGE REGELS
Een van de kwesties die de Nederlandse omroep aan de orde stelde in de gesprekken met de EBU betrof het filmen achter de schermen. We onthulden eerder al dat de twee partijen met elkaar in conflict waren over de vraag of er afspraken waren gemaakt om te voorkomen dat Klein achter de schermen zou worden gefilmd. De EBU ontkende dat er een schriftelijke overeenkomst was gesloten, terwijl AVROTROS beweerde daar bewijs van te hebben.
In het interview bevestigt AVROTROS dat er veranderingen zullen komen in de regels voor het filmen tijdens de wedstrijd. Terwijl in de verklaring van gisteren werd bevestigd dat de EBU het filmen achter de schermen “sterk zou verminderen”, heeft de omroep verduidelijkt dat artiesten niet langer zonder toestemming gefilmd mogen worden in backstage ruimtes en kleedkamers.
Een perswoordvoerder van AVROTROS legt verder uit:
““[Filmen] wordt nu een stuk beperkter en het is ook echt verboden voor mensen om artiesten zomaar achter de schermen te benaderen. Dat moet eerst langs een Hoofd Media die dan toestemming moet geven. Dus niemand kan meer onverwacht met een camera geconfronteerd worden.”
Iedereen die artiesten achter de schermen wil filmen - inclusief de EBU’s eigen content teams - moet nu expliciet toestemming krijgen van het Hoofd Pers/Media van de respectievelijke delegaties van de artiesten. Dit zal ook gelden voor ‘embedded media’, die naar Bazel reizen als onderdeel van de nationale delegaties die deelnemen aan het Songfestival.
NIEUWE DETAILS OVER MALMÖ
De manier waarop de situatie in Malmö rond de deelname van Joost uit de hand liep, verraste het hele AVROTROS-team. Toen we Zimmermann vroegen naar zijn ervaring van de gebeurtenissen dat weekend, zei hij dat hij en anderen binnen AVROTROS “verrast” waren toen Joost zijn nummer “Europapa” niet ten gehore bracht tijdens de eerste repetitie van de grote finale op vrijdag 10 mei.
“We waren er klaar voor om de dag te beginnen. Ik nam een kop koffie en liep wat rond. We wilden naar het optreden van Joost gaan kijken. En hij verscheen niet op het podium. En toen hebben we meteen aan de bel getrokken en gezegd, wacht even, wat is hier aan de hand? Ik wil nu met de hoogste ambtenaar spreken...en toen werd er gezegd: “Ja, er is gisteren iets gebeurd. We hebben Joost er nu uitgehaald."
EXCLUSIEVE ONTHULLING: SCRIPT LAAT VROEGE BESLISSING ZIEN
We kunnen exclusief onthullen dat de beslissing om Joost zijn optreden uit de eerste generale repetitie van de finale op vrijdgochtend te halen al meer dan een half uur voor aanvang door de EBU was genomen, om 12:56 lokale tijd. De EBU heeft niet gereageerd op eerdere verzoeken om commentaar over waarom hij vervolgens gewoon deelnam aan de vlaggenparade aan het begin van deze repetitie.
We hebben via verschillende bronnen een script-update verkregen die op vrijdag 10 mei om 12:56 lokale tijd naar alle delegaties en productie medewerkers is gestuurd. De repetitie begon om 13:30 lokale tijd in de Malmö Arena en het optreden van Europapa stond gepland om 14:05 lokale tijd De update gaf al de hele Nederlandse uitvoeringssequentie weer als “deleted”, ofwel “verwijderd”.
Hoewel deze verandering werd doorgegeven aan alle delegaties van het festival een uur voor de Nederlandse inzending zou optreden, lijkt het erop dat de delegaties niet rechtstreeks op de hoogte werden gesteld van de verwijdering van Joost. Het grote aantal scriptupdates betekent dat het aannemelijk is dit niet is opgevallen bij vele ontvangers voordat de repetitie plaatsvond.
Klein zei zelf dat hij vrijdag 8 uur backstage heeft gezeten in een interview met Eva Jinek gisteravond, voordat hij meer informatie kreeg over zijn status in de competitie.
ONDERHANDELINGEN EN RESULTAAT
Zimmermann vertelde in detail hoe de omroep probeerde te onderhandelen met de EBU om de situatie op te lossen en vroeg hen om “hem tenminste aan het eind van de middag te laten optreden” terwijl ze probeerden een oplossing te vinden. Hij betreurde het dat dit niet mogelijk was:
“Natuurlijk zag je een enorme frustratie van ons over hoe dat proces verliep. Natuurlijk wil je als volwassenen om de tafel gaan zitten. En die kans hebben we maar heel beperkt gekregen.”
Maar desondanks zegt Zimmermann dat AVROTROS erg blij is met de maatregelen die de EBU heeft genomen om de wedstrijd te verbeteren. Hij zegt dat, als het om Eurovisie gaat, “ik nu eigenlijk vooral zin heb om vooruit te kijken”, en hij wil dat fans zich weer “richten op het plezier” van het Eurovisie Songfestival:
“Ik zou willen zeggen: Laten we er allemaal weer een beetje van genieten. En de randvoorwaarden en de dingen eromheen een beetje relativeren. En vooral focussen op het leuke van het Eurovisie Songfestival. De verbondenheid en een verdomd goed lied. Dat zou ik het komende festival toewensen.”
VERSLAGGEVING DOOR:
GJ Kooijman
EBU AND AVROTROS CLASH OVER FILMING AGREEMENTS
Picture credit: EBU/Sarah Louise Bennett
by GJ Kooijman, Gabe Milne, James Stephenson and Sem Anne van Dijk
The European Broadcasting Union (EBU) and AVROTROS are at odds over whether agreements were made to not film Joost Klein backstage before and after his performances at Eurovision 2024.
Speaking with both the EBU and AVROTROS regarding the matter, both parties are claiming their own view of whether these arrangements were made, and in what way. This was one of several key questions asked to both parties to clarify the timeline of events and the decision-making process leading up to the disqualification by the EBU.
EBU
In an email sent by its Communications team to Eurovision journalists GJ Kooijman, Gabe Milne, James Stephenson and Sem Anne van Dijk, the EBU states that they are not aware of any agreement that stated Joost could not be filmed backstage.
They also specified that AVROTROS had not sent a written request to the EBU about filming Joost:
“We can however confirm that we are not aware of any agreement being in place not to film Joost Klein backstage during the Second Semi Final, and there is certainly no written request from AVROTROS regarding this matter.”
The EBU subsequently stated the following:
“We do not wish to revisit, or enter a public debate regarding what happened backstage on Thursday 9 May.In agreeing to participate in the Eurovision Song Contest all artists commit to abide by the rules of the event which include the possibility of being filmed backstage.
We are mindful of the impact of the multiple pressures that competing in the world’s largest live music event can have on artists, and indeed those working on the event. This in no way excuses the inappropriate behavior of any individual, and we stand by our decision to take the action we did in disqualifying Joost Klein who was in breach of our rules. We will not tolerate threats made to members of staff in the process of conducting their duties.”
This is the first public acknowledgement of the impact that competing in the Eurovision Song Contest can have on artists following an in-depth review of the 2024 contest (done by Pernille Gaardbo) which included recommendations on Backstage Safety and Wellbeing for competing artists.
AVROTROS
However, after putting the EBU’s comments on filming arrangements to AVROTROS, the broadcaster responsible for the Dutch entry to the Eurovision Song Contest, they have responded questioning the EBU’s version of events.
A spokesperson for AVROTROS stated in response that the broadcaster “strongly disagrees with the proposed course of events as outlined by the EBU.” They also confirm that AVROTROS has shown the EBU evidence of these agreements being made, but says they cannot go into further detail:
“AVROTROS strongly disagrees with the proposed course of events as outlined by the EBU. We have shown the agreements about not filming Joost (including evidence) to the EBU (and these agreements were also respected up to the performance in the semi-final on May 9), but have not heard any response to this either.”
The disagreement between AVROTROS and the EBU marks the latest flashpoint in their ongoing dispute over Joost Klein and the Netherlands’ disqualification from Eurovision 2024 this past May.
Joost was disqualified from the contest by the EBU on the day of the Grand Final after an incident that took place backstage during the Second Semi-Final two days prior. During the incident, Joost made a “threatening movement” towards a videographer working with the EBU, which hit the person’s camera.
INVESTIGATION
An investigation led by the Public Prosecutor’s Office in Malmö concluded that they couldn’t prove Joost intended to seriously threaten the person involved. We spoke to the Senior Prosecutor in charge of the case, Fredrik Jönsson, who said on the investigation:
“It is not possible to prove that the suspect had other intentions than to influence the plaintiff's film recording. And based on an overall assessment, it's not possible to prove that the act was likely to cause serious fear, nor that suspect's intention to cause serious fear. He did make a movement towards the plaintiff, and he hit the plaintiff's film camera.But I can't prove that he did that in intention to cause serious fear.”
When asked specifically about agreements not to film Joost, Jönsson stated that multiple witnesses mentioned these. However, as this was not part of the investigation these claims have not been verified by the senior prosecutor.
BACKGROUND
After the closure of the investigation into Joost Klein’s actions, the EBU and AVROTROS have taken different views on the investigation’s outcome. In separate statements released after the investigation was closed, AVROTROS and the EBU outlined their positions.
The Dutch broadcaster reiterated that they believed Joost’s disqualification was "disproportionate". AVROTROS has also requested urgent talks with the EBU about the disqualification in the next few days. The broadcaster also wants to discuss several other matters which they say have been outlined in a letter of objection which the EBU has not yet responded to.
However, the EBU maintains the EBU's decision to disqualify Joost "was made in strict accordance with Eurovision Song Contest rules and governance procedures". Furthermore, they claim that the Swedish police's decision to close the case "does not have any impact on our decision which we stand by completely".
As it stands, it seems any future talks will also consider whether Joost should or should not have been able to be filmed behind the scenes. The existence or absence of such agreements could significantly influence how this incident is perceived by the EBU, AVROTROS and the broader Eurovision community.
EBU EN AVROTROS ONEENS OVER FILMAFSPRAKEN JOOST KLEIN
Photocredit: EBU/Sarah Louise Bennett
door GJ Kooijman, Gabe Milne, James Stephenson en Sem Anne van Dijk
De European Broadcasting Union (EBU) en omroep AVROTROS zijn het oneens over de vraag of er afspraken zijn gemaakt om deelnemer Joost Klein niet backstage te filmen voor en na zijn optredens tijdens het Eurovisie Songfestival 2024.
In gesprekken met zowel de EBU als AVROTROS over deze kwestie, houden beide partijen vast aan hun eigen visie op de vraag of deze afspraken zijn gemaakt en op welke manier. Dit was een van de vragen die aan beide partijen zijn gesteld om de tijdlijn van de gebeurtenissen en het besluitvormingsproces dat leidde tot de diskwalificatie door de EBU te verduidelijken.
EBU
In een e-mail aan Eurovisie-journalisten GJ Kooijman, Gabe Milne, James Stephenson en Sem Anne van Dijk, verklaart de EBU dat zij niet op de hoogte zijn van enige overeenkomst die zou hebben bepaald dat Joost niet backstage gefilmd mocht worden. Daarnaast bevestigen zij dat AVROTROS geen schriftelijk verzoek heeft ingediend bij de EBU om Joost niet te filmen:
“We kunnen echter bevestigen dat we niet op de hoogte zijn van enige overeenkomst waarin is vastgelegd dat Joost Klein niet backstage gefilmd mocht worden tijdens de Tweede Halve Finale, en er is zeker geen schriftelijk verzoek van AVROTROS met betrekking tot deze kwestie.”
De EBU voegt hieraan toe:
“We willen niet terugkeren naar of deelnemen aan een publiek debat over wat er backstage is gebeurd op donderdag 9 mei. Bij deelname aan het Eurovisie Songfestival verplichten alle artiesten zich aan de regels van het evenement, waaronder de mogelijkheid om backstage gefilmd te worden. We zijn ons bewust van de druk die deelname aan het grootste live muziekevenement ter wereld kan veroorzaken bij artiesten en medewerkers. Dit rechtvaardigt echter op geen enkele manier ongepast gedrag, en we blijven achter ons besluit staan om Joost Klein te diskwalificeren voor zijn schending van de regels. We zullen geen bedreigingen tegen ons personeel tolereren tijdens de uitvoering van hun taken.”
Dit is de eerste keer dat de EBU publiekelijk erkent welke impact deelname aan het Eurovisie Songfestival kan hebben op artiesten, na een grondige evaluatie van het festival in 2024, uitgevoerd door Pernille Gaardbo, waarin aanbevelingen zijn gedaan over veiligheid en welzijn van artiesten en crew backstage.
AVROTROS
Na deze verklaring van de EBU heeft AVROTROS, de omroep verantwoordelijk voor de Nederlandse inzending, gereageerd door de versie van de EBU over de gebeurtenissen in twijfel te trekken. Een woordvoerder van AVROTROS verklaart:
“AVROTROS is het pertinent oneens met de voorgestelde gang van zaken zoals geschetst door de EBU. We hebben de afspraken over het niet filmen van Joost (incl bewijs) getoond bij de EBU (en deze afspraken werden tot aan het optreden bij de halve finale op 9 mei ook gerespecteerd), maar ook hier tot op heden geen reactie op vernomen..”
Dit meningsverschil tussen AVROTROS en de EBU is het laatste twistpunt in hun conflict over de diskwalificatie van Nederland bij het Eurovisie Songfestival 2024.
Joost werd door de EBU gediskwalificeerd op de dag van de finale van het Eurovisie Songfestival na een incident dat twee dagen eerder plaatsvond tijdens de tweede halve finale. Joost zou een “dreigende beweging” hebben gemaakt naar een videograaf die voor de EBU werkte, waarbij de camera van de videograaf werd geraakt.
ONDERZOEK
Een onderzoek door het Openbaar Ministerie in Malmö concludeerde dat er onvoldoende bewijs was dat Joost de intentie had om de betrokken persoon serieus te bedreigen. Senior Officier van Justitie Fredrik Jönsson, die verantwoordelijk was voor de zaak, verklaarde:
“Het is niet mogelijk om te bewijzen dat de verdachte andere bedoelingen had dan om de filmopname van de eiser te beïnvloeden. Op basis van een algehele beoordeling is het niet mogelijk om te bewijzen dat de daad waarschijnlijk ernstige angst zou veroorzaken, noch dat de verdachte de bedoeling had om ernstige angst te veroorzaken. Hij maakte een beweging naar de eiser en raakte de filmcamera van de eiser. Maar ik kan niet bewijzen dat hij dit deed met de bedoeling om onveiligheid te veroorzaken.”
Hoewel verschillende getuigen melding maakten van afspraken om Joost niet te filmen, waren deze claims geen onderdeel van het onderzoek en zijn ze dus niet geverifiëerd door de Officier van Justitie.
ACHTERGROND
Na de sluiting van het onderzoek namen de EBU en AVROTROS verschillende standpunten over de uitkomst. AVROTROS herhaalde dat zij de diskwalificatie van Joost als “disproportioneel” beschouwden en drong aan op dringende gesprekken met de EBU over de diskwalificatie en andere zaken die in een bezwaarschrift zijn genoemd, waar de EBU nog niet op heeft gereageerd.
De EBU blijft echter bij hun standpunt dat de diskwalificatie van Joost “in strikte overeenstemming met de regels en procedures van het Eurovisie Songfestival” is genomen. Ze stellen bovendien dat de beslissing van de Zweedse politie om de zaak te sluiten “geen invloed heeft op ons besluit, waar we volledig achter staan.”
Toekomstige gesprekken zullen naar verwachting ook ingaan op de vraag of Joost al dan niet gefilmd had mogen worden achter de schermen. Het bestaan of ontbreken van dergelijke afspraken kan de manier waarop dit incident wordt gezien door de EBU, AVROTROS en de bredere Eurovisie-community aanzienlijk beïnvloeden.