The ‘Apolitical’ Aesthetic: How Wars Turn into Content

Today, everything has become content. Wars are content. Occupation is content. Even something as serious as genocide becomes content if it is presented well with good lighting and clear audio.

Recently, a person supporting Israel appeared on many Indian podcasts. These podcasts are part of a system created by people like Ranveer Allahbadia and Tanmay Bhat. These shows call themselves “long conversations” that are deep and meaningful. But often, they miss one important thing: questioning the guest properly.

The guest was welcomed warmly. Instead of asking tough questions, the hosts treated him like they would treat a business leader or a self-help speaker. The tone was very relaxed, almost like a friendly chat or brand promotion, not a serious political discussion. What was surprising was not just what was said, but what was never asked.

There were no interruptions when big claims were made. No one questioned the statements that matched government views. No one asked for proof when history was explained in a one-sided way. The hosts kept nodding and listening politely, giving the impression that they were neutral. But this kind of politeness is not journalism.

At one point, the guest said that support for Palestine is just a trend or influenced by certain groups of people. This was said casually, like it was not a big deal. But this idea makes people’s anger looks fake or unimportant. It reduces serious issues like violence and suffering into something like a social media trend. But outside the podcast, the reality is very different.

These podcasts came after the violence in Gaza during the Israel–Hamas war. Buildings were destroyed. Hospitals were damaged or full. Many civilians, including children, were killed in airstrikes. Journalists on the ground showed painful scenes—families searching through rubble, makeshift burial areas, and drones flying constantly. But these realities were mostly missing from the podcast discussions.

Podcasts like this focus more on keeping viewers interested than asking hard questions. Controversy is allowed only if it doesn’t harm the host’s image. This is why people often say, “It’s a complex issue.” While it is true that the situation is complex, this phrase is sometimes used to avoid taking a clear stand.

Because of this, important details get blurred. The word “occupation” becomes “conflict.” Civilian deaths are called “collateral damage.” Slowly, language changes how people understand reality.

At the same time, influencers like Prajakta Koli work in a system where they have to be careful about what they say. They speak about issues when it feels safe. But when a topic is risky or could upset followers or brands, they often stay silent. This is not always because they don’t care, but because of how the system works.

Social media rewards content that gets attention, not content that is right or ethical. Brands avoid controversy. Audiences are divided and can react strongly. So, serious issues are either simplified or ignored.

In the end, the podcast finishes, clips are posted, and people start commenting and arguing. The algorithm spreads the content and helps it earn money. But real life continues.

And that reality is not content. It is real, painful, and still ongoing far away from these smooth and comfortable conversations that try to explain it.