Top News

News India Live, Digital Desk: Lyricist, writer and former Rajya Sabha member Javed Akhtar, famous for his outspoken and clear views, has made a scathing attack on censorship and the decisions of film bodies in the Indian film industry. He has directly raised the question that how some films which allegedly contain obscenity get the green signal, but the films which reflect the realities and bitter truth of the society are often censored or banned.

What is Javed Akhtar’s issue?

Javed Akhtar says that:

• Selective censorship: Film bodies, often called the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) or Censor Board, selectively ban films or demand the removal of scenes. The basis of his criticism is that films depicting problems, evils or realistic depictions prevailing in the society are unnecessarily censored.
• Obscenity and double standards: At the same time, such films in which ‘obscenity’ or ‘obscenity’ are clearly visible are easily ‘cleared’. Javed Akhtar believes that this is a double standard, where other parameters are being given priority instead of artistic expression.
• Restrictions on Art: He also argues that this attitude prevents cinema from acting as a mirror of society. Movies are not only a means of entertainment, but they are also a powerful medium of social dialogue, stimulating ideas and making people think. When these are banned, it is a direct attack on artistic freedom.

History of the dispute:

It is not a new thing that the Indian Censorship Board has been in controversies regarding its decisions. Many filmmakers and writers have in the past also raised questions about censorship rules and how they are implemented. Often small budget independent films or films that try to say something different from the mainstream have to face more problems.

This statement of an experienced and respected person like Javed Akhtar can spark debate both within and outside the film industry. He believes that films have the power to educate and change the society, and it is not right to ban such films while anything is being served in the name of entertainment. It will be interesting to see how film bodies respond to this criticism and whether there is any change in their decisions in the future.