Days after condemning a section of Indians for stereotyping Rhea Chakraborty as a ‘gold digger’ and a ‘witch’ who brought ruin to the late Sushant Singh Rajput’s flourishing life, liberals are now doing exactly what they had set out to speak against, i.e., stereotyping an Indian community for the faults of one individual.
While condemning those who foul-mouthed Bengalis was the right thing to do, liberal media outlets and their stereotypical journalists for whom Bihar and North India is the epicentre of all evil harbour nothing but an explicit prejudice for the ‘cow-belt’ region (as they say). It seems that they have now initiated a concerted PR campaign in favour of Rhea Chakraborty, despite an abundance of evidence against her.
Rhea Chakraborty is not to be seen as a villain, according to a minuscule section of Indians with a disproportionate grasp over the country’s media. Journalists who were excited when terrorists broke into the country’s Parliament in 2001 are now referring to Sushant Singh Rajput as a small-time actor from Bihar who therefore does not deserve much attention. To the same effect, Rajdeep Sardesai, while speaking to Lallantop, said that the 34-year old was not such a big actor anyway for which the Mumbai Police should have been put under so much pressure.
“Who is that VIP pressurising the police forces to carry out investigations?” probed Rajdeep Sardesai, which in itself is a big statement against Mumbai Police. If a high-profile case such as that of Sushant, as claimed by Rajdeep, requires VIP intervention, we can only imagine the plight of common citizens in India’s financial capital. Sardesai seems rather irritated with all the importance being given to the death case of Rajput and further exposes his shallow mindset which considers justice and closure only a luxury to be availed by the country’s high and mighty elites.
“Sushant Singh Rajput is not such a big star that Mumbai Police should be put under so much pressure.”
You should be ashamed of yourself for giving such a horrible statement, @sardesairajdeep. pic.twitter.com/xRl5ojKpbV
— Madhav Sharma (Modi Ka Parivar) (@HashTagCricket) August 8, 2020
Ravish Kumar, who should otherwise be proud of Sushant, a son of Bihar who made it big in India’s Bollywood industry, shared an NDTV article which blames right-wing populism for the limelight which the Sushant Singh Rajput case is getting. Taking to Facebook, the ever-irritated journalist captioned the article as, “The obsession with Sushant Singh Rajput’s Death signals a dangerous turn in India’s polity.”
The article shared by Ravish derides right-wing populism, as the sentiment which the Indian masses are attaching to the case of Rajput is due to their identification with the actor’s struggles, and how he, as an outsider to Bollywood, broke multiple glass ceilings. The author portrays this “right-wing populism” which has come to dominate Indian polity as a major reason why the death of the actor is getting undue attention. The writer also indicates that the right-wing, consisting of India’s majority, have risen in arms against the country’s elite, although the masses of a country rising against the elite is an inherently Leftist feature. Essentially, the article blames India’s right-wing for raking the issue to an extent it should not have been.
The Print, though, decided to give up even the artificial pretence of not being hateful towards the cow-belt – the region of India where the right-wing thrives. One Jyoti Yadav, who is a ‘journalist’ at the publication, thought it fit to stereotype Bihar as a state where toxicity in families forms an integral part of everyone’s life. While she seems rather agitated with all Bengalis being stereotyped due to Rhea Chakraborty, the author brazenly stereotypes Bihari families as those being ‘toxic’ in nature, where the boys are expected to be the Shravan Kumars their entire lives.
The article also goes on to spread a rather false narrative of Bihari families not giving their sons any autonomy to make life decisions, not to mention, them frowning upon the prospect of their son being controlled or snatched by a girlfriend from the big cities. Yadav tries to project Biharis as regressive people, and their families as toxic. What is shameful, however, is that the writer has the temerity to even suggest that such an environment leads to the sons distancing themselves from their families. The writer also goes to claim that Sushant Singh referred to his mom alone, who had passed away when he was a teenager. The remaining family, including his father, Jyoti thinks, held no importance in the late actor’s life.
A concerted effort is being made by a motivated section of people and media, seeking to whitewash all ‘potential’ criminalities which were could have been allegedly committed by Rhea Chakraborty, and further portraying her as a classic victim of stereotyping. While it is true that Rhea is certainly not guilty until proven, but, how come his family is guilty along with the entire Bihar and North India? Isn’t it also a part of getting justice?
In their endeavour to run a PR campaign for Rhea and also against the ‘cow-belt’ region, the liberal media of this country has exposed their own vile and hateful perception for Bihar and ‘right-wingers’ in general.
