“Among 1.46 billion people in India (United Nations Population Fund, 2025), 85.5% (Comprehensive Modular Survey: Telecom, 2025) silently participate in corrective measures on how social commentary is built on digital mediums,” writes Usha Kumari.
Why do we wait for social media to shame? A culture that calls out the imbalances of power—and often attracts anger as a byproduct—is steadily shaping a new narrative of accountability. The infamous biryani incident, recent waves of public protests, and the suspension of a doctor in Haryana are among several instances that were widely circulated and debated on social media platforms. Many such cases, often involving individuals in positions of privilege or authority, have attempted to resist digital criticism by approaching courts to challenge online discourse. In recent rulings, courts have often viewed such expressions as “reasonable criticism,” reinforcing the legitimacy of digital speech within constitutional limits.
However, the increasing frequency of such events that draw both public and judicial attention signals the rise of digital vigilantism—an irreversible feature of the modern information ecosystem. As societies move deeper into AI-driven communication spaces, public demand for accountability is intensifying alongside growing ambiguity around what constitutes acceptable behaviour. Thousands of videos circulating online also reflect evolving thresholds of tolerance and the informal systems through which content is monitored and judged. These moments go beyond a click, a share, or a like—they represent collective emotional responses that unite audiences around perceived injustice.
Recently, an incident involving an angry school headmaster filmed in a confrontation with a parent sparked widespread outrage online. The ensuing backlash led to a public apology from the headmaster. Beyond the apology itself, the episode highlighted a deeper expectation: that individuals in authority must uphold dignity, empathy, and restraint in their interactions with those they serve.
As a social media user, I try to understand the context of such events before forming an opinion, to maintain a balanced perspective. What stands out is that the spotlight often falls on a single incident among many similar occurrences. Yet, beneath the surface of comment sections lie countless unspoken stories of individuals facing similar issues without platforms or voices to be heard. For instance, rising cases of dowry deaths remain deeply concerning. The recent Bhopal dowry case, which drew national and international attention, including from the Indian diaspora, reignited debates on women’s safety within marriage. While legal proceedings remain essential for justice in such cases, digital attention has played a crucial role in bringing them into public discourse.
Another example of calling-out culture emerged when a social media influencer from Rajasthan faced widespread criticism from creators who disagreed with her content. The episode highlighted that building a large audience is not just about expression, but also about responsibility. While social commentary may be personal in nature, its impact often extends far beyond individual intent, shaping broader behavioural narratives. Amplifying opinions may drive engagement, but their public consequences can sometimes escalate into collective outrage, blurring the boundary between accountability and mob behaviour.
In another case where comedy crossed into offensive territory, the National Commission for Women took cognisance and registered an official complaint. Authorities responded promptly, and agencies such as the Mumbai Police used public messaging to raise awareness against inappropriate content. The widespread digital backlash helped establish clearer societal boundaries around dignity and respect, particularly concerning gender sensitivity. It reinforced the idea that humour, while free, is not beyond ethical limits.
This raises a larger question: should societal boundaries be reinforced proactively, or must we wait for social media to enforce them through public outrage? Calling-out culture has influenced diverse sectors—from food and fashion to branding and communication—often ensuring accountability where traditional mechanisms fall short. It has also amplified voices that were previously unheard, contributing to greater transparency and responsiveness.
At its best, digital accountability reflects a culture of people holding power to account. However, when detached from context and proportionality, it risks transforming into uncontrolled collective outrage. The challenge lies in ensuring that this evolving digital conscience strengthens justice and empathy, rather than replacing due process with viral judgment.
About the author:
Usha Kumari is a brand marketing professional and communication expert. She has worked with Aditya Birla Fashion & Retail and CaratLane, and consults brands on content and brand marketing. She serves as Visiting Faculty at the National Institute of Fashion Technology.
