Divided in Love, Rishi-Ranbir are united in their hate of media
Subhash K. Jha
Rishi Kapoor and his son Ranbir don't see eye to eye on any issue. Both father and son have told me that the relationship is, at best, troubled and unfulfilled, and that father and son communicate through Neetu Kapoor.
While they agree to disagree on most issues, there is one thing that Rishi and Ranbir agree on. It is their aversion to the press. While Ranbir discreetly chooses to stay away from the paparazzi and secretly holds them responsible for his relationship problems (how? Don't ask). Rishi openly and contemptuously lashes out at the media at every given opportunity. This seems a little silly considering how much he likes to talk.
Rishi, of course, conveniently retracts when the situation gets sticky for him. Repeatedly, he puts his foot in his mouth and then blames the media for it.
In his latest outburst against the media, Rishi was joined by his elder brother Randhir, who complained that his grandson Taimur Ali Khan (daughter Kareena's son) was not getting a normal upbringing because of the intrusive paparazzi.
But, isn't the exposure of the child to the media the parents' choice? If Taimur and the earlier star-kid favourite AbRam are getting more attention than Aamir Khan's little son Azaad, does it mean Saif Ali Khan and Shah Rukh Khan are bigger stars than Aamir? Or that Taimur and AbRam are more popular children in the media than Azaad or Aaradhya?
No. Aamir has chosen to keep his son away from the limelight. And the Bachchans too have decided they will limit Aaradhya's public appearance.
"Normal" is a state of mind which most celebrities are progressively isolated from. Before seeking normality, Taimur's family needs to define it and decide what is normal for them. Being in the limelight is not normal for children from working-class homes. Being celebrity parents if you have a problem with your child getting undue public exposure, then the choice is yours.
Just say no. Unfortunately, it is not a "no" that Bollywood's biggest want. They want yes-men masquerading as mediapersons to write exactly what they want. Sadly, in the hunger for news, the entertainment media is swallowing every bone in the mistaken hope of finding some meat. This week there were two absurd reports which no one swallowed. One suggested that Shah Rukh Khan had turned down two roles offered by Sanjay Leela Bhansali.
First, our actors should know it is extremely bad manners to talk about turning down roles. Nowhere else in the world do actors and their overzealous PR machinery speak on roles that are turned down. Secondly, which are these two films that Bhansali is making to offer them to Mr Khan? He hasn't even begun planning his next. Thirdly, at this juncture in his career, when the projects that he's choosing are letting him down, why would Mr Khan turn down Bhansali?
Even more ludicrous are reports that Priyanka Chopra is likely to do a sequel to "Aetraaz". So says producer Subhash Ghai. Is Priyanka Chopra mad to return to the role of a female predator who crawls and slobbers all over her employee Akshay Kumar. In this era of Harvey Weinstein, the last role Priyanka Chopra would play is that of a sexual predator.
Stars want to be politically correct in their postures both off and on screen. But for that to happen, they first need to look at their own lives and rectify the anomalies and contradictions. So please don't give interviews after downing a few pegs in the evening and then deny your quotes when you see them staring at you the next morning.
(Subhash K Jha can be contacted at jhasubh@gmail.com)
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
'Still have freedom of speech': HC says no to plea against wife's cancer cure claim of Navjot Sidhu
New Delhi (PTI): Observing there still was freedom of speech in the country, the Delhi High Court on Wednesday refused to entertain a plea against Congress leader Navjot Singh Sidhu's claims that certain remedies helped his wife in her battle against stage 4 cancer.
A bench of Chief Justice Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela said the former cricketer had only voiced his opinion and the petitioner was also free to counter the claims.
"He is just voicing his opinion. Counter his claims by holding a press conference. Counter free speech by free speech and not by curtailing his free speech under the fear of legal action or contempt. We still have freedom of speech in this country," the bench said.
The bench went on to underline, "You can't say freedom of speech be curtailed. You counter his claim. This is not our domain. If you don't agree with this gentleman's views, don't listen to him. There are a lot of books which you may feel are bad, don't read them. Who is asking you to read them? Free speech is not meant to be curtailed by bringing them to court and putting them under the fear of contempt withdrawn."
As the court made it clear that a writ petition couldn't be entertained, the petitioner sought to withdraw it.
"We can't entertain a writ petition on this. Thousands of people claim they have a cure for something but that does not mean you will seek action against them."
At a press conference in Amritsar on November 21, Sidhu stated that his wife Navjot Kaur Sidhu had been declared cancer-free, emphasising the role of dietary and lifestyle changes in her recovery.
He then said his wife's diet included things like lemon water, raw turmeric, apple cider vinegar, neem leaves, basil, pumpkin, pomegranate, amla, beetroot and walnuts which made her healthy.
After oncologists questioned his claim that a strict diet helped his wife defeat stage 4 cancer, Sidhu clarified on November 25 that the diet plan was implemented in consultation with doctors and should be considered "facilitation in the treatment".
During the hearing, the petitioner said he was against Sidhu's claim on 100 per cent cure of cancer questioning if tulsi and ashwagandha fully could defeat stage 4 cancer.
Sidhu's video circulated on various social media platforms and news channels, and as a celebrity he had influence over many, it was claimed.
The petitioner therefore urged the court to restrain circulation of the videos saying misinformation was being peddled.
The court, however, said if Sidhu's wife, who was a doctor herself, felt better by following a particular diet, it was good.
Justice Gedela remarked if the petitioner was really concerned about public interest, he should go and file a petition against the manufacture of cigarettes and alcohol.
On November 23, Dr C S Pramesh, director of Tata Memorial Hospital, which specialises in cancer treatment, posted a video of Sidhu's press conference on X and said, "Parts of the video imply that starving cancer by avoiding dairy products and sugar, and consuming haldi (turmeric) and neem, helped cure her 'incurable' cancer".
He added, "Please don’t believe or be fooled by these statements, regardless of who they come from. These are unscientific and baseless recommendations. It was surgery and chemotherapy, which are evidence-based treatments, that made her cancer-free, not haldi, neem, or other such remedies".
