Daily Newsings: 29 April 2025

Vulgarity in TV shows, arguments for and against regulations, and the role of art in society

Daily Newsings are musings on the daily news.

A public interest litigation has been filed in the Supreme Court, complaining that inappropriate and vulgar content was being streamed on Over-The-Top (OTT) platforms such as Netflix, Amazon Prime, etc. The Supreme Court has asked for the Government's opinion on the matter and commented that it may be outside the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court to pass a ruling on the matter. The legislative or the executive wing of the government would have to come up with guidelines.

It is common knowledge at this point that TV shows and movies increasingly include language and scenes that would have been considered inappropriate at earlier times. The public tolerance for what is deemed acceptable in media has been increasing, and it looks like it will keep increasing.

Consider the first Indian TV shows. They were either religious such as Ramayana or patriotic such as Fauji or just middle-class family drama such as Hum Log. This was the era when Doordarshan was the only channel available. With the liberalisation of the TV industry and the entry of private companies, you have shows like Hasratein (1996-99) which started depicting previously taboo topics such as extramarital affairs. Although Hasratein was considered bold and controversial back when it was released, it would seem tame by today's standards.

In many articles and papers, one can find shows like Hasratein which ventured into taboo topics, being described as "ahead of its time."¹ The phrasing itself shows an assumption that with the progress of time, what was previously taboo will no longer be taboo.

Language is another area where things have been changing. Words that were considered abusive and vulgar were not shown on television. Now, with the rise of OTTs, which aren't subject to similar regulations as traditional TV, the use of vulgar language in television shows is increasing.

So, should governments censor and regulate the creation of such shows?

What is the argument against regulations?

A lot of taboos do need to be broken, and regulation could stifle healthy discourse. Let's take the example of menstruation. The taboo around the topic often led to feelings of shame in women. It also often prevented women from getting access to health and hygiene products. But media… movies like Pad-Man for all its problems still generated discourse around this important topic… media played a role in breaking taboos around the topic. Another example would be mental health. Movies such as Dear Zindagi contribute a lot to showcasing therapy in a positive light.

This is the progressive impulse in every culture.

Cultures can become rigid and oppressive with rules and structures that end up causing a lot of harm to the members of the society. The progressives are the people who keep asking the question, "How do we improve as a society?" And they are an important part of every society.

If the Government overly regulates and censors media, the progressive nature of society will be stifled. That is not good for a healthy society.

Regulation could also easily become a means for the Government to censor any form of broadcasting that is against their interests. It is a weapon in the hands of the Government. Even if the Government today wants to use it benevolently, the elected Government of tomorrow might choose to use it differently.

What is the argument for regulations though?

Cultures come up with rules around what is acceptable and what is not acceptable based on their values. The intent of most of these rules is to help people. For example, it is not acceptable for TV shows or movies to glorify bullying and present it in a positive light.

This is the conservative impulse in every society.

Conservatives are the people who ask the question, "How do we preserve all that is good, true and beautiful?" They conserve what is good in each culture.

A society will be healthy only with the right balance of conservatism and progressivism.

Without the progressives, culture will become dead, rigid and oppressive. Remember the Pharisees? They were conservatives of their time who had a lot of power.

At the same time, without the conservatives, a culture will descend into chaos, losing a sense of all that is good noble and beautiful. As Yeats expresses in the poem, ‘Second Coming,’ "Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold; Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world."

Governments have a role to see how they may promote virtue in society. And so one could argue that some form of regulation is indeed necessary.

The role of artists

This debate also challenges us to think about the role of artists in society. As Christians, we understand that art can perform 2 crucial roles.

Firstly, art can sensitise us to the reality of sin. Human beings have the remarkable skill of sensory adaptation. We see the world is broken but we quickly adapt to it. Sometimes, it is good for us to be reminded of how utterly broken our world truly is. Otherwise, we risk growing too attached to it. When art reminds us of how completely broken and sinful humans are, it creates in us a dissatisfaction with the current world and a longing for the world where justice reigns.

Art that fails to look at the rot in the world comes across as detached from reality and unrelatable. This is the reason traditional TV shows became irrelevant. It felt too artificial. People want to watch shows where the characters talk like the people they meet in real life.

Secondly, art can also create a longing in us for what is true, noble and beautiful. It can evoke hope and a sense of wonder in the viewer. Perhaps through a character who shows noble and heroic traits that the viewer aspires to emulate. Perhaps through a theme in the story that there is always light at the end of the tunnel. Happily ever-after endings might seem unrealistic but they are ultimately real. Our world will be made new and we will live happily ever after in the new heavens and new earth.

Many modern television shows (Mirzapur, Sacred Games, etc.) are good at the first function but fail at the second. Older traditional television was normally good at the second but failed at the first. We need honest and good storytellers who will try to perform both functions through their art.

1. Parmar, Kajal, and Manisha Pandit. "The Evolution of Mediated Youth Culture: OTT as “New Television” in India." Off Screen 25.2-3 (2021).