Judging by the title of his 2009 book-making india work-William Nanda Bissell, one would think, knows a thing or two that tickles us. The Fabindia chairman may not be a high profit-maker—he says companies need a “good objective” to last for the long haul—but that honesty doesn’t take away from his rigorous business savvy. Speaking to a broadsheet in 2016, Bissell said he was not surprised by the growth in sales of the Patanjali product: “If it had come out 10 years earlier, it might not have had as much success. People are hungry for symbols of their culture. Huh.” Bissell had read what was written on our walls.
The recent ‘Jashn-e-Riyaz’ controversy suggests an anomaly. It seems that Bissell’s clear-sightedness is the exact opposite of the intentions of his company’s marketing arm. By employing Urdu in the Hindu festive season, the now controversial Fabindia campaign seemed somewhat oblivious to the fact that India’s increasingly homogeneous “culture” had fewer “symbols” that one could have appropriated. After working in advertising for 17 years, writer Anuja Chauhan says, “Fabindia’s Jashn-e-Riyaz branding was completely effortless, and I’m pretty sure they didn’t expect any trolling to come across. And that’s why it’s very worrying. Our secular space is shrinking fast.” Chouhan is spot on. For these self-appointed mediators of Indian culture, Fabindia’s “tribute” didn’t just leave a mark, it was a slap in the face.
BJP MP Tejashwi Surya had clarified by tweeting on 18 October. “Diwali is not Jash-e-Riyaz [sic]”This deliberate attempt to de-brahify Hindu festivals depicting models without traditional Hindu dress should be thrown out.” Surya, the national president of the BJP’s Yuva Morcha, has a social media following, he wrote. Both his allies and opponents can envy. For many of the MP’s 972,000 followers, his anger was more than a clarion call, it was also a mantra. As the tweet went viral, it organized a ruthless and unruly mob By evening, #BoycottFabIndia was a Twitter trend.
The nature of social media obscures an obvious fact—thousands of users collectively feel that resentment is often produced by a few individuals who can influence and drive opinion. Surya dominates today as his Twitter followers are also his cadre. His outrage, like his loyalty, can be drummed up at a moment’s notice. When he tweets that “brands like Fabindia will face economic costs for such deliberate misadventure”, Surya is not only making his point, but he is also issuing a decree to his followers – Hit them where it hurts. The bark of a 30-year-old is not uncut.
In May this year, Surya had gone to his constituency in south Bengaluru to inspect a Covid war room. Out of 205 people employed there, Surya selected 17 Muslims and sought their qualifications. Sixteen lost his job. A large section of those who then defended and celebrated Surya’s actions are today making the case that Fabindia coined its slogan to “deliberately hurt Hindu sentiment”. Using words such as “attack” and “attack”, they frame their attack as a form of retaliation.
Worse still, the trollers’ blood boils after Fabindia’s backlash. Threatened to withdraw its ad, Fabindia, some people feel, probably surrendered too easily. Brand consultant Santosh Desai wrote in a recent editorial: “When [brands] They hold back as they hastily strengthens the arms of the trolls, who get even more excited the next time around. ,
IIn a week that has been open season for cultural gatekeepers, brands have been targeted for causes that border on the ridiculous. Saddened by the fact that a jewelry brand did not insist on its model sport bindi, a right-wing influencer tweeted, “If you want Hindu money, learn to respect Hindu sentiments.” While there may still be confusion about what a “Hindu sentiment” is, there is a general consensus about what it inhibits. BJP MP Anantkumar Hegde, in a letter to CEAT CEO Anant Vardhan Goenka, clarified that an advertisement for his tires was causing “unrest among Hindus”.
In a sizzling CEAT ad, we see Aamir Khan giving himself a lofty advice before turning himself down—don’t burst crackers on the streets. In his letter, Hegde writes, “Nowadays, a group of anti-Hindu actors always hurt Hindu sentiments, while they never try to expose the wrongdoings of their community.” Although he never provides evidence as to why Khan is “anti-Hindu”, he does offer a litany of “wrongdoings” for which Muslims can be blamed—”Streets being closed in the name of Friday prayers Blocking”, “Mix arranged louder than “Top of Mosques”, and so on. His fanaticism is raw, but hackneyed.
Instead of insulting, Surya and Hegde, both MPs, have begun to express their displeasure at the idea of contamination. His disapproval suggests that any association with the Urdu language or Muslim actor would vitiate the purity of Hindu festivals like Diwali. This approach not only makes an already marginalized community more vulnerable, but it also links inter-religious kinship with malpractices.
Unlike outrage, which can be monotonous and one-dimensional, advertising, especially good advertising, hinges on layered storytelling. Tanishq’s TV commercial ‘Confluence’, released a year ago, told a friendly story that wanted to defeat hatred, not incite it. A Muslim mother surprised her Hindu daughter-in-law by organizing a traditional baby shower. Seeing the pregnant woman confused, her mother-in-law asks with an unarmed smile, “Isn’t it customary to keep daughters happy everywhere?”
Making the case that the ad was both perpetuating and sanctifying ‘love jihad’, right-wing activists began tagging Tanishq employees on social media and threatening to harm them. The Tata Group’s jewelery subsidiary withdrew the film “keeping in mind the hurt feelings and well being of our employees, partners and store employees”. It was the offline muscle that gave the now an online hashtag—’#BoycottTanishq’—its teeth. Congress MP Shashi Tharoor was perhaps appropriate to tweet then, “Why don’t they boycott India – the longest living symbol of Hindu-Muslim unity in the world?”
Days after the controversy hit the headlines, Home Minister Amit Shah was asked about the Tanishq uproar in an interview. “I believe there should be no form of hyperactivity,” he said. “Small incidents,” he said, cannot break our “social harmony”. Shah’s comments suggest that his ideology is the opposite of that of Surya and Hegde, but seeing as how these young MPs have again invented outrage to rally their followers, one has to wonder whether His online hatred has official sanction. If this happens, there is much more at stake than our “custom” of “social harmony”.
fire and fury
A brief history of brands that have “hurt Hindu sentiments”
brooke bond
In 2018, Brooke Bond released an ad that ultimately proved more divisive than enthusiasm. It is not easy for everyone to see a man overcome his hesitation and buy an idol of Ganesha from a Muslim artisan. #BoycottRedLabel will soon become a model for “Hindus to unite and oppose such acts”.
Javed Habib
In 2017, Jawed Habib featured in a Kolkata newspaper advertisement showing Goddess Durga and her divine attendant being pampered in one of his salons. Though Habib apologized for the ad and its tagline – “God also goes to JH Salon” – he could not stop the mob attack on his Motinagar branch.
Manyavar
In an effort to replace Kanyadaan’s wedding ritual with a trendy, more progressive hashtag — #kanyaman — Manyavar hired Alia Bhatt and gave her a full two minutes to explain why women are not assets. Both the actor and the apparel brand were accused last month of “subtly isolating Hindus”.
surf excel
Holi can be tricky territory for a mosque-going boy who doesn’t want to get his whites dirty. In Surf Excel’s 2019 ad, we see its young Hindu friend offering the solution. She challenges all the kids around to paint her instead. Twitter reaction: “My order cancelled, Hindu fears cited!”
Fame (Dabur)
Neither conservatives nor liberals were unanimous about Dabur’s recent Fem Cream Bleach ad. Seeing a lesbian couple celebrating Karva Chauth, there was a split in both the sides. In the end, Madhya Pradesh minister Narottam Mishra’s anger forced Dabur to “apologise unconditionally”.
,