Rules of courtesy | Entertainment News, The Indian Express

The Indian Guild of Entertainment Journalists (EJGI) boycotted Kangana Ranaut after his vindictive momentum at an event organized to promote his film Judgmentall Hai Kya. Ranaut's anger was the scribe. Justin Rao had committed the crime of having asked a relevant question about his film Manikarnika (at the time of his release, Justin had asked why the film was coming out of Pakistan while post hyper patriotic Ranaut had strongly criticized the others for organizing a event there). "Justin went to see hamstring dushman ban gaye! Badi gandi gandi bate likhte ho. Itni gandi soch hai aapki, "cried Ranaut from the podium, while producer Ekta Kapoor and actor Rajkummar Rao watched him speechless, either stunned, or too scared to step in. Poor Justin's voice went out when he faintly protested that his intimidation tactic was profoundly unfair – Ranaut being a big star who was charging him from a scene, he, the shy, poorly paid can with "barely 600 subscribers on Twitter". The EJGI said in a statement that it would ignore Ranaut, but an apology is clearly far away. Since that incident, Ranaut has accused journalists of attending press conferences for free food and termed them "termites".

Instead of moral supervision, if India had a culture of discipline and police customs, Ranaut would deserve a life sentence … without bail. Or, in a finishing school, the video of his verbal altercation with Justin Rao on YouTube could become a prototype of what no adult should behave, regardless of his provocation. The actor, blatantly using the power badociated with celebrity status to reduce a film critic in public, recalls the deeply puzzling explanation of US President Donald Trump as to why he could not be described as a badual badault against women. star they let you do it. Like Trump, Ranaut thinks she has the divine right to sneak on those who have the temerity to disagree with her. His behavior is in line with all the psychological research done on power. The more important a person is, the easier it is to take on others, repelled by the erroneous belief that the sun is shining from their curtains.

The appalling crudeness of Ranaut with this journalist is symptomatic of many interactions in the Twitter post. At the time, the prevailing consensus was that there was something admirable about insulting people in the face. However, in India, land of wild incoherence among citizens, one of the implicit standards for measuring integrity has always been the treatment of people less powerful than us. Although Karan Johar's show and his encouragement of a culture of nepotism deserve to be praised (Johar's power is five times that of Ranaut), at the same time, Ranaut's scornful denigration of journalists is unacceptable. Is it because they do not exert the same influence as a Johar, she just can not understand how they do not owe her unconditional adulation? Mrs Ranaut would do well to remember that, even if what we think is commendable, it is only if what you say does not expose you to a situation of absolute control.

People who want to have the power to fulfill their ambition can do it. can only be achieved by getting others to see things in their own way – usually do it in a slightly more sophisticated way, trying, in a way, to conceal their own selfish goals and interests. Ranaut is incredibly talented, but his immature attempts to bulldoze in the big league turn against him. This is obvious to everyone except her. Ranaut has managed the first wave of feminism with some quotes and without entering his personal life, has generated enough debate about fair play in an industry known for its vagueness. However, filmmaking is a complex and expensive activity, involving both art, but also business and relational skills. Nobody likes crazy people; whether in movies or journalism, or even work in business. Each industry places more emphasis on consistency and professionalism than on occasional flashes of engineering. Ranaut does not do justice to these upheavals and, if she has the feeling of her own conservation, she apologizes to the IJGI and, in the future, records her story for the great screen.