The Bachchan family is again at the middle of dialog and this time for some bizarre reasons. Amitabh Bachchan, who is normally known for being liberal toward social reasons, was seen eating in a brilliant gold plate at the Kerala place of the proprietor of Kalyan Jewelers, Mr. Kalyan Raman.
This is just couple of days after his daughter in law, Aishwarya Rai – Bachchan was generally scrutinized for showing up in a daily paper notice for Kalyan Jewelers, the promotion included a dark skinned kid holding an umbrella for Aishwarya.
This promotion was criticized as it was facilitating slavery, racism and child labour altogether.
Aishwarya has offered her announcement through her delegates and said that the she was not included with the last picture. They have additionally offered the first picture as a confirmation of this.
Then again, it remains a question that whether famous people must be touchy about open issues and receive a way of life that does not appear to demonstrate an oblivious methodology toward social interest?.
In a time when Indian economy is yet to grow to the level where poverty has completely been eradicated, where farmers are dying everyday due to financial burdens, should Amitabh have not avoided eating in a golden plate offered by Kalyan Jewellers?
Could the simple act have made some impact on policy makers to be more sensitive about the issues of poor Indians?
Would this act have added to the respect that people have for the legendary actor?
It also raises a question that “Is the Bachchan family, which is one of India’s well known families, insensitive about
social issues?”
A valid argument is that celebrities have their own life and they are entitled to live it the way they want.
But more question do come up, here are few of them.
#Do celebrities have made everything on their own and people do not play any role in their success?
#Should Deepika have not been criticized for making the My Choice video?
#Are all social commitments reserved for politicians and other known personalities should not be burdened with them only because they do not go and ask for votes?
