I Will Be Mindful: Why Did Akshay Kumar Wait For Outrage To Step Back From An Ad

While all of us should have the freedom to choose, it plays out differently for people who live public lives. Often what a celebrity says, endorses or rejects helps form public opinion. Yes, their celebrityhood is the outcome of their professional choices. While they should have the freedom of doing what they want to and they may look at some tie-ups as completely commercial ventures, their actions have the power to form public opinion.

The case in point is actor Akshay Kumar's apology to fans after people on social media trolled him for appearing in a surrogate ad for a gutka brand. Is it possible in a world where every word a celebrity says is weighed by a robust PR team that being part of a surrogate ad was not a conscious choice?

Akshay Kumar apology

"I would like to apologise to you, all my fans and well-wishers. Your reaction over the past few days has deeply affected me. While I have not and will not endorse tobacco, I respect the outpouring of your feelings in light of my association with Vimal Elaichi. With all humility, I step back," Kumar tweeted. You can read the full note here. However, he has clarified the ad may run the "legal duration of the contract that is binding upon me".

Doesn't the decision to step back and donate the entire endorsement fee to a worthy cause at best look like damage control? The question is why did he need to wait for outrage for this understanding to dawn upon him?

Earlier in October 2021, as per media reports, megastar Amitabh Bachchan also withdrew from a surrogate Pan Masala advertisement after outrage. However, currently, Ranveer Singh and Big B are seen in a set of Elaichi advertisements during the ongoing IPL.

Surrogate advertising has been popular in India. Silver coated elaichi, Club Soda, mineral water bottles, CDs, calendars, Golf accessories, frontend ads for products that otherwise cannot be aired. Event sponsorships are another way of surrogate. It is just a way of circumventing the rules on selling tobacco and alcohol. Whether such advertising is ethical or not is a long-standing debate within the advertising community. So when there is an outrage how can celebrities walk away saying they didn't realise that it was a surrogate ad? Or is a mere apology enough? 

This isn't the first time an actor has faced criticism for ta professional commitment that seems to contradict their personal choices. Priyanka Chopra, who apparently lived with asthma as a child, appeared in two advertisements to not burst crackers during Diwali and faced severe backlash for the fireworks at her wedding in Umaid Bhawan Palace in Jodhpur. Netizens were quick to point out the double standard and her concern for the environment and animals. 

Suggested Readings: Four Films And One Series Later, Still No Woman Lead In Rohit Shetty’s Cop Universe

 It is not like we do not have celebrities who live up to our expectations- in 2017 the former Indian cricket captain Virat Kohli refused to renew his multi-crore brand endorsement deal with a cola brand simply because he had stopped consuming the product. Recent reports have also suggested that Pushpa: The Rise star Allu Arjun turned down an ad for a tobacco brand, despite being offered a hefty sum as it would misguide his followers.

In the world of social media where even a commoner can call out a celebrity they look up to, these ads are a slippery slope for those who endorse them. They are appealing to the youngsters as the meaning of what these commercials try to sell is not lost on anyone. While it is accepted that actors should have the freedom to endorse brands whether because their beliefs align or because of commercial gain, they owe their popularity to their fans and they should be conscious of their decisions and not try to appease them as an afterthought. 

 The views expressed are the author's own.