The News Broadcasters & Digital Association (NBDSA) has asked Aaj Tak to remove an entire episode of its prime-time show 'Black and White' aired on April 19, 2023, anchored by the channel's consulting editor Sudhir Chaudhary, which it found, had viol… Read on blog or Reader Alt News Read on blog or Reader NBDSA slams Sudhir Chaudhary, asks Aaj Tak to remove show on same-sex marriage By Oishani Bhattacharya on 4th February 2025 The News Broadcasters & Digital Association (NBDSA) has asked Aaj Tak to remove an entire episode of its prime-time show 'Black and White' aired on April 19, 2023, anchored by the channel's consulting editor Sudhir Chaudhary, which it found, had violated the dignity of the LGBTQIA+ community by failing to maintain neutrality, impartiality, and adherence to guidelines on the prevention of hate speech. The directive, dated January 24, came after a series of complaints filed by activists Indrajeet Ghorpade and Utkarsh Mishra. It also included the instructions to remove specific sections from two interviews conducted by Chaudhary, featuring Union home minister Amit Shah and his cabinet colleague Kiren Rijiju, in which they discussed the Supreme Court's deliberations on marriage equality. At the time of this article being written, the channels, however, have not removed or edited any of the three shows that the NBDSA found problematic. Show 1: This episode of 'Black and White' aired on April 19, 2023, had a Hindi title that could be translated to, "Black And White: A new debate on homosexuality in the highest court | Same-Sex Marriage | Supreme Court". The episode was aired in the context of a hearing of petitions seeking legal recognition of same-sex marriage in the Supreme Court by a five-judge bench led by former Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud. In his April 24, 2023 complaint to the NBDSA regarding the aforementioned video, activist Ghorpade alleged that the broadcaster violated the Code of Ethics and Broadcasting Standards, including neutrality, impartiality, objectivity, accuracy, privacy, and guidelines on the prevention of hate speech, potentially defamatory content, and reporting court proceedings. Two days later, on April 26, Mishra filed a similar complaint, stating that the broadcast violated fundamental principle Number 4, as well as Principles 1 and 2 of self-regulation, which mandated impartiality, objectivity, and neutrality in reporting. The channel's initial response was that these complaints were 'without any basis and, therefore, deserve to be rejected'. They stated that the programme in question discussed the consequences of same-sex marriage. What Happened on the Show? Anchor Sudhir Chaudhary opened the episode by stating, "India is still considered a third-world country because our issues consist of electricity, water, roads, healthcare, hunger, employment, etc. Developed or first-world countries do not face these concerns; their battles are different. Our country's concern is hunger, while in the case of first-world countries, it is depression or same-sex marriage. But today, we have prioritised this issue (same-sex marriage) without finding solutions to the problems concerning the masses. This is why, these days, a hearing regarding 'same-sex marriage' has been going on at the Supreme Court which is quite interesting." In what one might consider an act of dog-whistling against same-sex couples, he then asked viewers to imagine their son marrying a man or their daughter marrying a woman, emphasizing the shock such a situation might cause. At the 1:00 mark in the show, Sudhir Chaudhary described a same-sex marriage as a "big shock" (bada jhatka) and questioned how traditional wedding rituals in Hindu, Muslim, and Christian marriages would apply to such unions. At 2:12, the air of homophobia and stereotyping in the bulletin hit an unprecedented high (or low) when the screen displayed an image of a person half dressed as a man and the half as a woman (image below). With a smirk on his face, Chaudhary quipped, "In this image, you would be able to see both your son-in-law and daughter-in-law". Chaudhary also made the point that even after homosexuality was decriminalized, some privileged upper-class individuals from big cities would begin ask why homosexual marriages should not be allowed. It is noteworthy that in October 2023, the Supreme Court had ruled against legalising same-sex marriages and left it to the Parliament to decide on the issue. The complainant highlighted how the usage of such imagery as the one cited above was not only distasteful but also "promotes false notions and stigma against the LGBTQIA+ community." During the hearing, the broadcaster defended the use if the image stating, "One may disagree with the manner of projecting it, which some may consider unpalatable; however, the same does not violate the code of conduct. The picture cannot be construed to be in bad taste, as it is merely a manner of projecting people's views on both sides and cannot be regarded as violative of good taste and decency." It was also stated in the complaint that the channel played videos featuring LGBTQIA+ individuals and couples throughout the episode without their informed consent. Besides, according to the complainant, statements like "imagine your son marrying a man or your daughter marrying a woman" were intended to instill fear among viewers. In addition to that, the anchor echoed the "false and malicious idea" that this was an "urban elite" issue, the complaint noted. It is important to note that even today, many in Indian society continue to stigmatize the LGBTQIA+ community, making it difficult for non-heterosexual individuals to openly express their sexual orientation. This challenge is even greater in rural areas, where orthodox and conservative beliefs remain more deeply ingrained than in urban spaces. Many individuals who have come out with their sexuality have been made to undergo malicious and traumatising experiences such as conversion therapy in order to "fix them", even after Section 377 was removed. On the other hand, queer individuals hailing from urban India have the privilege of better access to resources such as support groups and a relatively better financial situation, which makes it somewhat more feasible for them to come out and speak on such matters. The NBDSA in its decision observed that Aaj Tak's broadcast on same-sex marriage violated the dignity of the LGBTQIA+ community by failing to maintain neutrality, impartiality, and adherence to guidelines on the prevention of hate speech. It noted that the anchor's remarks were inappropriate and did not include perspectives from LGBTQIA+ individuals. Further, the NBDSA directed Aaj Tak to remove the video from all platforms within seven days from the date of the order. Show 2: In his second complaint, the activists flagged a section of an interview conducted by Chaudhary with Union minister Kiren Rijiju. According to the complaint, the anchor falsely attributed statements to the CJI in the LGBTQIA+ marriage equality case and misrepresented the Supreme Court's stance. Chaudhary also inaccurately claimed that the solicitor general's arguments were being disregarded and made defamatory remarks implying the CJI was acting like a dictator. The complaint said that the broadcast violated the code of ethics & broadcasting standards concerning impartiality, objectivity, and neutrality, as well as guidelines on defamatory content and court reporting. Additionally, it breached the Contempt of Court Act, 1971. At the 30:21 mark of the above interview, Chaudhary stated, "The government has said that this is an elitist matter and CJI disagreed with that and said 'here only what I say goes' (Sarkar ne bola ye toh elitist vichaar dhara hain, aur unhone (CJI) ne kahan ki nahi aisa nahi hain aur yahan wahin hoga jo main chahunga)". The complaint says that the CJI never made such a comment. The channel said in its response that the host only pointed out that the Chief Justice had stated that the government could not decide what would be heard in court and remarked that the Chief Justice himself would determine this. At the 33:03 mark, the anchor said that it seemed like the solicitor general's arguments were not being given importance at the court and that the Supreme Court appears as if they had already decided their judgement in favour of the petitioners (Solicitor General ki Supreme Court mein chal nahi rhi hain, aur Supreme Court aisa lag rha hain ki mann bana chuka hain ki wo chahta hain aisa ho). Further, at the 34:53 mark of the video, Rijiju talks about how, in a democracy, it is the citizens of the state who decide, as sovereignty lies with them. Chaudhary then says, 'So, to make it simpler for the larger public to understand, you are saying — and have said in the past as well — that 'Hindustan kisi ke baap ka nahi hai, desh ke logon ka hai, aur kuch log ise chalane ki koshish kar rahe hain' (Hindustan does not belong to anyone's father; it belongs to the people of the country, and some people are trying to control it)." NBDSA has directed the channel to remove the aforementioned parts from the interview video and asked the anchor to show more maturity in future while conducting such programmes. Show 3: Ghorpade's third complaint flagged certain parts of another interview conducted by Sudhir Chaudhary featuring Union home minister Amit Shah at India Today's Karnataka Roundtable 2023. At the 39:43 mark in the interview, while posing a question to Shah, Chaudhary said, "It seems that the Supreme Court bench is bringing in a new logic to justify why this should happen in our country. What is your take on this matter as the home minister of the country"? The complaint says that the anchor's statement was inaccurate, as the Supreme Court bench had not made any official comments or declared that same-sex marriage should be legalized. In response, the channel argued that the statement in question needed to be understood in context and that the complaint lacked objectivity, as it directly targeted the host and his interviewing style, which is inherently subjective. NBDSA ordered the anchor to maintain maturity in future broadcasts. Additionally, India Today was directed to edit and remove the problematic portions of the broadcast within seven days of the order.

Alt News © 2025. Manage your email settings or unsubscribe. Get the Jetpack app Subscribe, bookmark, and get real‑time notifications - all from one app! Automattic, Inc. 60 29th St. #343, San Francisco, CA 94110