Let me begin by saying that I believe boycott calls are an excellent form of protest; a great way to show disapproval and call for change. Boycotts were used brilliantly as a tool against foreign oppression during colonial times, which helped encourage swadeshi manufacturing and revive Indian cottage industry. So I support citizens using a boycott call to express their angst and bring about change. However, there is a difference between calling for a boycott on legitimate grounds and bullying. And when there is a new call for boycott practically every day, this loses meaning and efficacy. Let us look at why hashtags such as #BoycottBingo, #BoycottZomato, #BoycottTanishq have been trending recently.
This is an advert about a Bingo snack where Ranveer Singh can be seen being silly and whacky; which he does quite effortlessly even in other ads and movies. So this mid-30 guy is being harassed about his plans now that ‘college is over’ (we’ll let that obvious WTF moment pass). In response, he lets forth a stream of obvious gobbledygook, that supposedly leaves everyone foxed.
Silly but some would find in funny maybe even pick up a pack of Bingo when at the store next time. We move on, right? Not quite. The netizens were apparently deeply affronted by that ‘scientific’ spiel. Why? Because it was presumed that this made fun of, wait for it… the late Shushant Singh Rajput. How? This is where it gets a little blurry for me. By all accounts, Sushant wasn’t just a talented actor but highly intelligent; an engineer by training and a winner of the National Physics Olympiad. How people made that leap from a stream of obvious nonsense in an inconsequential and obviously silly ad to making fun of a beloved actor is rather bizarre. The company clarified that the ad was made in 2019, before the tragic death of the actor, but that didn’t cut any ice with the offended brigade.
I wonder who was being made fun of when Amitabh Bachchan spouted a spiel of big words in the song My Name Is Anthony Gonzales? Because is sort of not-so-intelligent humour has been pretty much par for the course for us all this while.
Not so long ago, people were asking for a Zomato boycott because the company stood by an employee when a customer discriminated against him on the basis of religion. Now there is a #BoycottZomato call because actor Swara Bhaskar tweeted to the food delivery company and the company merely responded. Bhaskar (who is routinely trolled, threatened and abused on social networks for her independent views) asked Zomato not to advertise with Republic TV because in her view they spread hate in the guise of news. Zomato responded with this tweet which says “we’ll look into it”. And this was grounds enough for a call to boycott Zomato and #BoycottZomato was trending.
We’ve all seen or at least know about the ads that jewellery maker Tanishq had to take down: one about an interfaith marriage and another that mentioned a cracker-free Diwali. The backlash against the interfaith ad was quite brutal. People didn’t just ask for a boycott of the company. There were details and screenshots of Tanishq employees being circulated, calling for them to be targeted. At least one Tanishq shop owner was intimated by a group and forced to tender a written apology. The Diwali ad spoke mainly about spending time with family over the festivals, but the one line that earned ire of the offended-brigade was about not bursting crackers. Tanishq had to take down both ads.
Like I said, I support boycotts – they are a legitimate form of protest. For instance, I boycott news channels that do not check facts, peddle hate, indulge in one side reporting, and act as cheerleaders for the government. This is both my choice and my right.
However, I don’t believe that others also should not have the option to watch the channels that I dislike or disagree with. I would never call for their ban nor would I want that all channels should only have content that I like or approve of. A difference of opinion, debate and discussion, are the lifeblood of a healthy, thinking citizenry. I also think that no one should be allowed to threaten and intimidate those channels into airing content that they disagree with or disapprove of. And I am certainly against anyone threatening the life, liberty and families of people working for those channels. I may be wholly against a certain type of reportage, but I am equally against any political witch hunt against anyone, on either side of the political divide.
The thing is we cannot call for a boycott of anything and everything that we don’t like or disagree with. When calls for boycott are this frequent they lose all meaning. Further, when companies are threatened with vandalism, their employees abused and endangered, this is when boycott becomes bullying and intimidation. This is when a legitimate protest becomes a mob frenzy. This is when we permit the chipping away of a little more at our own democratic rights and liberties.
Do you have something interesting you would like to share? Write to us at [email protected]
