Mumbai: The entertainment world was recently shaken by the findings from the Hema Committee Report, which shed light on rampant sexual harassment against women within the Malayalam industry. This has struck a nerve, especially given the precedent set by the MeToo Movement, which previously exposed harrowing tales of casting couch incidents in Bollywood. The stir rings louder because it reflects a persistent issue, not just in regional cinema but also in other significant entertainment industries across India. However, TV industry insider and popular actress Kamya Punjabi vehemently asserts that television operates on different, cleaner standards.
Kamya Punjabi, who has cemented her place as a leading TV actress over decades, made these claims during an interview with News 18. Emphasizing the cleanliness of television as a domain, she pointed out, “Television has been very clean. I don’t know what used to happen in the past but now it is very clean. There is no such filth here. People aren’t forced or blackmailed here. There is no casting couch. If you fit a role, you have talent, you will be selected for the show. I feel television is the safest place in the entertainment industry. Sexual abuse does not happen here. Whatever happens, because there is mutual consent. Nobody is telling anyone to sleep with them in the promise of a role.”
Her stance offers a stark contrast to the dark revelations unravelled by both the MeToo movement and the recent Hema Committee revelations in Kerala’s Malayalam cinema. Punjabi’s assertions come as a breath of fresh air, offering a semblance of refuge within India’s larger entertainment spectrum.
View this post on Instagram
A post shared by Kamya Shalabh Dang (@panjabikamya)
Yet, Kamya doesn’t deny the existence of unsavory behavior entirely. Instead, she takes a more nuanced stance, acknowledging that while certain “womanizers” exist in television, coercion and force are not the norm. She elaborates, “Some actors are womanisers, but if you stop it, if you make it very clear, such things do not happen.
. Nobody is being forced to do this. Aisa nahi hai ke aapko haath lagaya jaaega aur aap uncomfortable feel karoge. If you tell them, ‘Hello, I don’t like it’, you will not be touched. We have seen actors who get crazy for girls but nobody forces nobody.”
It’s important to note that Kamya’s observations are personal. She mentions incidents where a few have claimed to experience similar misconduct, but she maintains her stance that the television industry doesn’t reflect these broader trends. “I know of some people who say that such things have happened to them. But again, if a girl does not want, it will not happen. It does not happen in the television industry. I don’t know about films or OTT but it does not happen in TV,” she reiterated.
Kamya has had her share of tabloid scrutiny as well. Once in the limelight for her relationship with TV actor Karan Patel, the relationship dissolved amidst allegations that Patel was two-timing her. Despite her personal travails, she continues to hold her ground regarding the saner dimensions of the TV industry.
View this post on Instagram
A post shared by Kamya Shalabh Dang (@panjabikamya)
Addressing the criticism around this seemingly idyllic portrayal, Kamya emphasized the need for individuals to voice their discomfort clearly when boundaries are crossed. The underlying implication being that silence or hesitation might leave actions misinterpreted. However, such a viewpoint is also up for debate, considering not everyone possesses the presence of mind or courage to immediately address inappropriate advances, particularly when career stakes are high.
Her stance has brought forth an interesting dialogue. Is the television industry genuinely insulated from the deeply ingrained issues plaguing other entertainment sectors like regional cinemas and Bollywood? Are allegations of misconduct more scrutinized and less sinister in scale within television?
While the broader entertainment industry grapples with these revelations, Kamya’s assertions serve as both an optimistic viewpoint and a call to introspect within the TV domain. It brings into focus the contrasting dynamics at play: a largely unregulated film industry versus perhaps a more structured television sector, which navigates its workforce more ethically.
As the public and industry insiders digest the claims from the Hema Committee Report, a spotlight remains steadfast on whether Kamya’s clean portrayal of television stands the test of collective scrutiny or if further stories from within the glass box television will surface, challenging her narrative.
