We live in a time of heightened political, social, and even psychological polarization. Our views and opinions have become extremely divided, making it harder for us to find a common ground in all walks of life.
This is why I feel compelled to talk about so-called revolutionary Tamil talk shows—Neeya Naana, Vaa Tamizha Vaa, and others—that significantly shape our beliefs, perceptions, and reasoning. These shows are consumed by millions across platforms and hold immense influence in Tamil communities worldwide.
Why Did I Decide to Write This?
One day, while casually scrolling through my Facebook feed, a clip from Neeya Naana popped up. The conversation was short, crisp, and engaging.
Curious, I continued scrolling and more such feeds appeared. All the content shown on the feed revolved around relationships, gender issues, societal norms, stereotypes, cultural conflicts, etc.
While some of the content was indeed thought-provoking, others left me wondering, “Would someone really say this in public?” Unsurprisingly, many speakers in the videos were harshly criticized and trolled in the comment sections.
That’s when I began digging deeper—how are these shows made, what is their agenda, and what impact do they really have on society?
How Tamil Talk Shows are Conducted?
The most popular Neeya Naana show hosted by the articulate Gopinath was first premiered in Star Vijay in 2006. Much of its success can be attributed to his hosting style and ability to facilitate an engaging and insightful debate on sensitive topics.
The channel brings two groups of people on a common platform to debate for and against on a specific topic. The participants voice their views based on their background and experience. Apparently, the show is filmed over 5 to 6 hours on the set, and then edited down to a 1 hour broadcast (excluding ads).
Participants often display raw emotions—anger, frustration, empathy—that deeply resonate with viewers. Gopinath, acting as a mediator, sometimes aligns with or opposes a viewpoint based on his own judgment and experience. One wrong move, however, can cast either the speaker or the host in a negative light.
Here’s the critical issue: the authenticity of these shows is debatable. Because the show's appeal lies in compelling drama and heated exchanges, there's a possibility that producers script or manipulate content to maximize engagement and viewership.
Just within a year after launching Neeya Naana, Moorthy GS, a genuine participant, was disappointed by the way the show was organized. He took it online to vent out his anger and dissatisfaction.
He claimed that the host deliberately allowed only a few people to speak and ignored others - raising questions about fabrication and manipulation. Here are the screenshots of Moorthy’s views on the program. Remember, this happened in 2007.
Initially, I was tempted to dismiss it all—after all, TV shows are created to profit through viewership. But the issue runs deeper: some of the expressed opinions are socially harmful and dangerously misleading.
The Danger of Polarized Representation
Take, for example, a clip featuring a Muslim woman voicing a toxic opinion about placing elders in old-age homes. The language used was dehumanizing. While it’s unclear whether her views were genuine or scripted, such portrayals risk distorting the image of an entire community. Viewers may unfairly associate her statements with Islamic teachings—despite Islam’s emphasis on compassion and respect for elders.
In another show, the anchor Avudaiyappan in Zee Tamil went on to say that men are logical and women are emotional. How can sweeping generalizations like this arise from such limited, context-specific discussions?
In fact, women hold high-responsibility roles in top MNCs and Government sectors. Do they make all decisions based on their emotions? Don’t they apply logic in their decision-making process?
Likewise, men experience a full spectrum of emotions. These oversimplifications breed division and reinforce false stereotypes.
In another episode, some girls appeared to demand 100 sovereigns of gold, a luxury villa, and a wealthy groom in marriage—with no mention of love. It painted an extremely materialistic image of women, ignoring any nuanced perspectives that might have been edited out for dramatic effect.
This kind of cherry-picked representation projects a skewed view of societal norms and expectations.
How Talk Shows & Debate Undermine Logical Reasoning
The core structure of these talk shows relies on opposition—one group defending, the other attacking. In such settings, the goal becomes “winning” the debate, not seeking truth. Eloquence overshadows facts. Charisma trumps logic. Participants aim to overpower, not understand.
True knowledge and critical reasoning emerge from experience and deep reading—not from watching rehearsed debates edited for TV.
What Should Change?
I strongly believe that schools and colleges must rethink the concept of debates in classrooms or at any events. Instead, the teachers must focus on organizing dialogues that allow the students to be involved in a collaborative thinking process.
In a dialogue, there are no winners or losers. There’s only shared understanding. Students can ask questions, challenge ideas respectfully, and grow intellectually in a safe, non-polarized environment.
Comments