We need better influencers.

on performative activism and vague fearlessness

Influencers in India love to give lessons of productivity, self-love and pride but when the time comes for them to stand up to what they preach, they very conveniently, fly from the scene. Now this isn’t a jab. It’s a careful recollection of what I’ve observed to happen in real time on social media when the The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Bill, 2026 was very shamelessly passed by the govt of India. I waited for a bunch of my fav queer influencers to say something, anything on the issue, which directly impacted them. I scrolled, I waited, I refreshed- but all in misery. None of them addressed the very obvious elephant in the room and later, one of them posts a story that they’re ‘apolitical’ and speaking on state made laws isn’t their niche. They only make content for fun and people should take them as that only, and nothing else. Being one of their followers, yes I was mad. But I also realise the quiet truth which is woven into the profession of these public figures- which is careful dissent. Because in the country like ours, speaking up often comes with a loss. And in the race of staying relevant, these stars often abandon the very issues that they made a following from. Now this isn’t a thing that just came out of the box. We’ve seen this film before- it is a full circle. These people will choose legality over morality any day. In an attempt to myself discover these truths- I wrote this blog.

Scene 1

The king of Bollywood, the chocolate boy, the heartthrob smiles promoting a pan masala ad with two stars equally as famous as him. Pan Masala, the substance that is responsible for over forty percent of oral cancer cases in India. And the justification behind the ad is just as familiar- : “if pan masala is so bad, then ban it. If smoking is bad, stop the production of cigarettes. If you think soft drinks are bad, don’t allow them to be made. You sell it, you allow it to exist. Don’t stop my revenue.” It is a convenient argument, almost elegant in the way it shifts all responsibility upwards, towards the state- anywhere but the self.

A man who can sell anything from perfumes to luxury watches- suddenly think that his influence has limits. Or perhaps, that it conveniently ends where accountability begins. But the public is not naïve, and with great power comes great responsibility. The idea that influence carries no weight if it is not legally enforced, is, in itself, vague.

Yes, Mr Akshay Kumar’s apology does come. But that too, after immense public backlash. That raises a definite question- even accountability here is inconsistent. Why talk about discipline, health or social responsibility when you are going to step aside the moment brands give you some crores?

Scene 2

Then came moments hard to ignore.

Not advertisements, not brand deals, but national issues. Issues hard to scroll past.

From the student led voices contending the CAA (citizenship amendment act, 2019) to farmers protesting against the new laws in borders of the country- on hungry bellies and makeshift camps, the voices were loud, poignant and inescapable. But because of fear of the government and afraid of being labelled as ‘anti-national’, most of the Indian celebrities stayed silent. Here, silent felt deliberate. Because this was a matter of grave and immediate attention. So many citizens of India were almost stripped of their profession, their identity and their livelihood bare. The engagement was selective- even though the issue demanded more than aesthetic concern.

But because of fear of the government and afraid of being labelled as ‘anti-national’, most of the Indian celebrities stayed silent- which quietly reveals another layer of our argument effectively- the loss that comes with speaking up, it costs you followers, it costs you brand deals, it costs you opposition from the government.

But this pattern isn’t difficult to ignore. The higher the issue, the quieter the voice. The more the stakes, the safer the response. And somewhere in that comfortability, influence does indeed lose its meaning.

Scene 3

Then, the recent issue which made me question our influencers. Who are we truly voting for? Why are we choosing our influencers based off of comfort, aesthetic and people who agree with issues they should have been taking a stand against?

The Transgender Persons (Protection of Rights) Amendment Bill, 2026 is a sharp blow to the community it claims to protect. It reminds us of how fragile these rights still are. This moment should’ve been non-negotiable. It was a direct hit at individual and community rights, at the independence, at the blood, sweat, tears of the people of the transgender community who fought days and nights to protect themselves. To feel seen. To feel respected. To finally feel like people, and not objects. But look at the contrast- the silence explains it all.

This silence was symbolic. A symbol of how these preachers of pride and lgbtq rights would build a following out of these aspects- but would back out when the time comes to protect it, to speak about it.

Yes, being ‘apolitical’ is one thing, but why use the emotions of hundreds of thousands of people for your own benefit? To keep your pockets full, and moral empty? Shouldn’t humanity and the principles of virtue be chosen every day, and not just when it benefits your own self? What is influence truly then, if not learning to speak even when it comes with risk, justifying one’s values not only in words, but in moments that demand something more than performance? Even when it is unpopular, at risk or inconvenient?

‘Influence’, as the word suggests, isn’t only to advertise products and sell carefully curated opinions. It is to stand up against the wrongs, even when it is unpopular or uncomfortable.

Perhaps, the only way through is to be radical about OUR choices, what we as an audience accept from these creators. Every like, repost, comment promotes them, so why not do it thoughtfully? Why not question the media we consume? Because when people who control the media are indifferent and in vain towards such crucial issues, doesn’t that gets inculcated into us, the normal people who consume the same media? Influence does not exist quietly- it is a group project that is sustained quietly and collectively by those in power.

In the end, influence is not just about who hold it- but also who choose to sustain it.

And the silence should quite literally force us all to think and reflect. Because after all, silence is rarely penalised- it is often rewarded. And as long as it continues to be, there is very little reason for it to change.