In the past few days, tiatrist John D’ Silva has been in the news for all the wrong reasons. Internet and social networking platforms like Facebook and whatsapp have been abuzz with debates and discussions over his actions. It all started when John took offence over his image being used to parody the Government and expressed his disgust to the media over it. To make matters worse, he went to the extent of filing an FIR against Prashant Parab, the creator of the Internet meme. Is John right to act this way or is his reaction an over the top one?
Those familiar with social networking platforms will agree his reactions are perplexing, to put it mildly. This is something so trivial which he could easily have ignored but he acted otherwise. In his video interview to the Press, he has appeared more like a villain and not like the fun going person he is on stage. Many have been left wondering why he has reacted in such a furious manner. Is it just because of some felicitations or favours from politicians or is he going to be a candidate in the upcoming elections? Has this famed artist lost his voice or has he crawled when asked to bend? As John is a comedian/ humorist and associated in the tiatr Industry for long, many have found his actions ironical and hypocritical. The artist's only grievance is that his image had been used to parody the government without his permission. But is this such a big deal? John perhaps may be unaware but this is exactly how the Internet and social media works nowadays. There are so many parodies, jokes or animation videos on celebrities that circulate over such networks and the modern generation love them. Celebrities do not mind this as it gives them good publicity also. Anyone who has seen Prashant's meme will agree it is an innocuous one. It is plain humour. Such parodies, spoofs, cartoons or jokes on celebrities are nothing new and not unlawful as long as they are not obscene, morally depraving or defamatory. What provisions of law has this internet meme violated so as to warrant filing an FIR against Prashant? The great Nobel laureate Rabindranath Tagore has taught us to speak without fear and hold the mind high. Free Speech and expression has a sacrosanct place in a democracy and needs to be protected from complaints of frivolous or oversensitive nature. There can be no two different opinions about this. Someone like John, who is a comedian and a humorist, should have known this all the more since he's a part of the tiatr Industry and makes his living making fun of others. Some of his satires, comedy clips, songs and videos are far more insulting and obscene. Should the others retaliate and file complaints against him or against other artists? John has done a huge disservice to the tiatr Industry by complaining and filing an FIR. Even if he disagreed with the content of that meme, he could have reacted in a much more sensible manner and not taken the matter to the Police. Free Speech is guaranteed to us under Article 19(1) with reasonable restrictions under 19(2). Prashant's post can hardly be considered to fall within the scope of obscene, lascivious, lewd, defamatory or filthy which are the restrictions under 19(2). And the standard of determining what is lawful and not is changing day by day. Perhaps few decades back, using real pictures of celebrities may have been an offence but it is no longer so now. Times are moving forward and society is changing. Free speech is interpreted in a much more liberal manner today. Will an ordinary reader of common sense and prudence really believe that John and Selvy actually uttered those words or will they not know it is just plain humour to make a subtle point? And what is all this ado about, 3 LED bulbs? Can a Government or its actions or schemes not be beyond criticism? Ha! This is an issue which needs to be interpreted from the perspective of today's generation where internet memes are a reality. Cyber or smart phone users receive such images regularly on a day to day basis. They laugh, pass a few comments, have discussions on cyber groups and then move on to the next issue. A harmless meme must never be blown out into a major issue. If every celebrity on who a harmless spoof or a cartoon or a parody were to file an FIR, then the system itself will be crippled. No Nation or its people must lose their sense of humour, and if they do then the repercussions can be devastating. At times, humour can offend but let's not forget it also makes us laugh. The famed artist Pablo Picasso said, “Art is never chaste. It ought to be forbidden to ignorant innocents, never allowed into contact with those not sufficiently prepared. Yes, art is dangerous. Where it is chaste, it is not art.” Cartoons, caricatures, parodies, spoofs and other artistic forms of humorous expression fall within the domain of 19(1) and taking offence to these on flimsy grounds is a bad trend which will take the society backwards. Furthermore, such memes on celebrities, politicians and other famous personalities circulate all over the Internet and on social media platforms like whatsapp. So long as such memes are not obscene or defamatory, they are entirely legal and well protected under the fair use doctrine enshrined under section 52(1)(a) of the Indian Copyright Act. Does Modi or Rahul Gandhi or Parrikar or Churchill or Alia Bhatt file a complaint each time a joke or an Internet meme or a funny mimicry circulates over social media on them? Sometimes they are at the receiving end but it also gives them good publicity and keeps them in the limelight. That is the price one has to pay for being a celebrity, for good or bad. Laughter is the best medicine and a few laughs can never be bad. Being offended by some form of artistic expression that we see or hear per se is not a crime. An artistic expression has to be more than just offensive for it to be a crime. It has to be obscene, lascivious, lewd or filthy or of an indecent character or defamatory. That is the well settled law of the land. Prashant's post is nothing of that sort. There is no malice in it. It is just a simple artistic expression used by him to make a subtle point critiquing the Government’s LED bulb scheme.There is no direct criticism also. So why so much fuss? Artists are creative people with special gifts and talent. They must set a good example for others and not wrong ones. John is one such talented artist but his reaction on this issue is hypocritical and the public have rightly criticised him for it. It is in his, as well as the tiatr industry’s interest, that he withdraws the complaint. Otherwise it will set a bad trend and erring politicians who are criticised in tiatrs may file similar FIRs and then ask, “If you can be offended, why can’t we?” regards, Sandeep Heble Ph - 9326129171