The author unpacks the cultural choices embedded in advertising and questions whether any brand can truly remain apolitical.

I was 12 years old when a then-lesser-known Pankaj Tripathi walked into a citizen’s house to ask for their vote. The citizen poured himself a cup of tea whilst asking Pankaj what his political qualifications were. A thundering Jaago Re Jaago Re Jaago Re roaring in the background, a gobsmacked politician, an empowered citizen. That ad was imprinted in my mind because it told me that we’re not just consumers; we’re citizens that participate in society. Seeing that, I was convinced that I could walk up to those in power and hold them accountable. It took that ad 46 seconds to make me feel all of that. Can I feel like that again?

It’s fair to ask: When a brand is selling a product, why does it need to make it political?

When a brand spends crores of money, it also has an obligation towards its employees, retailers and the larger ecosystem that it sustains. All of which can be put at risk by backlash, polarisation, cancellation or even stores being heavily vandalised (we do seem rather fond of our lathis). Perhaps that’s why a brand’s opinions take a backseat to the responsibility of keeping the ecosystem running.

But is a brand ever selling its product alone?

I don’t think so. An ad doesn’t just sell you a product. Every ad is a choice made on: who gets to be represented, what does desire looks like, who gets to desire it, what does a normal family look like, what success is and what lifestyle is aspirational. These choices seem benign in a 60-second film, and we can brush it off as “it’s just an ad yaar”, but when this choice is repeated across thousands of ads, it constructs culture. If the families we see are heterosexual, upper-caste, Hindu, affluent and living in a certain kind of home, that isn’t politically neutral. What we choose not to show is a choice too.

So then, I guess the more interesting question to ask is not whether ads should be political but whether they can ever be apolitical.

If a jewellery ad shows an interfaith married couple, its sparkling jewellery is of course being sold. But so is the idea of an interfaith marriage as something that can be ordinary, something that can belong in an Indian household.

Of course, I remind myself that a brand is not a social enterprise; it’s made for a commercial purpose. And my cynical antennas are always up when brands piggyback on socially topical days. But I guess this is why the ‘Jaago Re’ ad stayed with me because its commercial intent and cultural impact could coexist. Tata Tea was just selling tea, but along with that it seeded that idea of an engaged citizen in me.

Advertising doesn’t need to stop being capitalist to be political; it just needs to acknowledge that the things it sells aren’t only products.

Sometimes, it can lay big questions in our tiny hands, along with a cup of tea.

The author is a Mumbai-based writer-director. This opinion piece was first published in our September issue's Her Take column. Click here to buy!