The controversy revolving around a YouTube show called India’s Got Latent has recently stirred the digital space, featuring comedians and content creators Samay Raina and Ranveer Allahbadia (a.k.a. BeerBiceps). An overtly inappropriate and distasteful question asked in the show sparked global rage, resulting in the forced deletion of the content by the creators, along with public apologies.
This incident, however, rekindled the already smoldering fire on the limits of free speech.
Where does one stop and say that this is humour while that is freedom of expression and something else is vulgarity? Is free speech an absolute right, or are there implicit responsibilities linked with it?
This discussion delves into the various shades of the argument, presenting both camps in the debate, while driving home the point that vulgarity should never be termed as free speech.
Understanding The Load of Controversies
A highly offensive remark was uttered by Ranveer Allahbadia on the show before one contestant: “Would you rather watch your parents have sex every day for the rest of your life, or join in once to make it stop forever?”
That remark was rude and definitely out of place. It became the issue of ridicule- not only among the public at large but also among politicians and social commentators, who called it ‘distasteful and crossing the boundaries of public decency.’ Even the National Commission of Women, NCW, took cognizance of the matter: they summoned the creators and recommended legal action.
Apologies were rendered later by Allahbadia and Raina, claiming they had ‘misjudged the audience’s reception’, and confirming that the offending segment had been taken down from their platforms. Meanwhile, the harm had already been done, prompting larger debates on the limits of free speech and its morality.
Also Read – Trending GD Topics for MBA Aspirants in 2025
Freedom of Speech: A Fundamental Right
Freedom of speech is one of the most vital pillars upon which rests a democratic society. It allows the individual to express ideas, contest norms, and participate in an open discourse without fear of suppression. Historically, it has always played an important role in social change, revolutions, and challenges to authority.
From the Abolition of Untouchability to the Global MeToo Movement, it has empowered voices once silenced. In the realm of art and entertainment, comedians and writers typically resort to satire, dark humour, or bold statements to force society to introspect itself.
But does one have a right to express anything and everything in crude, offensive terms?
Check out – Gender Equality: A Human Right, Not a Privilege
The Fine Line Between Freedom of Speech and Vulgarity
The right to free speech is indeed important, but it is not an absolute right. All democracies, including India, impose reasonable restrictions on obscene, defamatory, inciting violence, or disturbing public order speech from exercising such freedom.
Vulgarity is often confused as uninhibited self-expression; but really, this isn’t so; in fact, filthy speech dilutes meaningful discourse, which is the very essence of meaning given to it.
To quote India’s Got Latent: The comment did not provoke thinking, nor did it provide any useful perspective. It was simply offensive at best, devoid of substance, and counter to responsible content creation totally.
Why Vulgarity Cannot Be Defended as Free Speech :
- Lack of Constructive Value – Speech is not to generate meaningful discussion. Crude utterances do not add substance to conversations.
- Psychological Impact – Unpleasant remarks have disturbing psychological effects especially on the impressionable audience.
- Legal Boundaries Exist – There exist provisions in IPC Section 294 (Obscenity) and other sections of the IT Act which restrict vulgar and offensive content under Indian law.
- Public Sentiment Matters – Social norms and cultural sensitivities must be respected. Offending large sections of society cannot be justified under free speech.
Also Read – Is There a North-South Divide in India?
The Pros and Cons of Absolute Free Speech
Pros:
- It leads to the Socratic Method Embrace debate.
- A free-speech society makes many opinions and asks many questions.
- It strengthens democracy by being the means through which all citizens hold their leaders accountable and speak about their injustices.
- Every kind of creativity challenges a status quo without earmarking it in an environment, thus promoting freedom.
Cons:
- However, Risk of harm: remarks can inflict psychological wounds on people or communities that are marginalized.
- Erodes social values: the norms of decency will wear away if vulgarity can be regarded as lifestyle.
- Legal: obscene or defamatory speech is prohibited by law in most countries, including India.
Striking a Balance Towards Regulating
This is the balance one needs to maintain between letting people speak freely and preventing the exploitation of the platform to peddle either obscenity or dangerous rhetoric. Social media and entertainment sites should, therefore, develop stricter policies on content moderation to safeguard free speech from being misused by distastefulness.
There are comedians and content creators who get a lot of power within those audiences. Humor is a wonderful reason to point out issues within the society, but it shouldn’t at all become an excuse for speaking wrongly or offensively. It would not be shock value, going overboard, but rather intelligent and major discussions that really matter to consider.
Legal institutions have one of the role to play. Yes, the Constitution provides for the exercise of free speech, but at the same time, there are reasonable restrictions that fall under Article 19(2), whereby threats to public morals or order make the content illegal. Thus, content-generating people need to consider these boundaries while putting something up for public consumption-the fact that there are clearly defined limits.
Final thoughts
The whole controversy about India’s Got Latent serves to remind us that freedom of expression does not grant a license for vulgarity. Democratic societies thrive on dialogue, yet dialogue may not be any agenda-driven, but socially thought-provoking, responsible, and respectful of cultural sensibilities.
“Humor” and “free expression” really post in their need for a new golden rule for content: to steer clear of making any kind of vulgarity or erosion of social values and disrespecting the very essentials of meaningful communication. Content creators have to find a balance of power between their words, and the audience should hold them responsible for that balance.
We must, as a good society, differentiate the right to express freely from the bad expression. Free speech should inform, challenge and inspire but not degrade or offend. Let us create a culture where expression is free but at the same time dignity and respect are not jeopardized.
