BollyWHAT?: For Clueless Fans of Bollywood Films!

So who's next? Dev Anand anyone?  :o



from ABC News Online

Last Update: Monday, March 14, 2005. 10:25am (AEDT)

Network snares actor in Bollywood sex sting

A private television network in India has broadcast footage of a sting operation showing a popular Bollywood actor demanding sex from a reporter who posed as an aspiring actress.

The India TV program sparked uproar in India's entertainment industry with film-makers demanding action against the actor, Shakti Kapoor, who was trapped by a New Delhi-based female journalist.

Kapoor was seen apologising on camera when it became apparent to him that he was snared by journalists in a Bombay hotel.

The TV station said the exercise was part of an expose on what it called the sexual exploitation of female debutantes in Bollywood and not a campaign to smear Kapoor, who has starred in scores of commercial films.

"If you are with Shakti Kapoor, no one can touch you ... if you are tired I will give you a massage," the actor said on camera. He was later recorded demanding sex from the reporter.

Kapoor, who campaigned for India's ruling Congress party during last year's national elections, also named Bollywood's three top actresses and said they had offered sex to producers to grab leading roles in movies which became box office hits.

Shubash Ghai, one of the producers named by Kapoor, called for action against the actor and said Kapoor's conduct dealt a stunning blow to the industry, which produces about 300 films a year.

The television station later interviewed a number of aspiring actresses with at least two of them pointing fingers at known film-makers, saying they too had made similar demands from them.

Kapoor, who made his first film in 1982, said later he had been framed.

-AFP

SHAKTI HAS OUTED YASH CHOPRA AS A CASTING COUCH VILLAIN! (and Subhash Ghai, but everyone knew about that). 

Man, after the Chopra comment, Kapoor's career is over...

Shakti has been framed: P Nihalani (http://ww1.mid-day.com/news/city/2005/march/105537.htm)
   By: A Mid Day Correspondent
   March 14, 2005

The Shakti Kapoor episode has left Bollywood stunned. The screen villain was caught on camera allegedly propositioning a wannabe actress on a TV news channel. In the alleged sting operation, Kapoor has named Subhash Ghai and Yash Chopra as directors who use the casting couch.

Now, an angry Ghai and Chopra have strongly denounced Kapoor’s actions and have said the film trade associations would take action against him.
Ghai said, “We haven’t decided whether to file a case or ban him from films.

That’s a decision that will be taken by the association.” It is believed a secret meeting was convened at Pehlaj Nihalani’s home last night.

Nihalani is the President of the All India Motion Pictures and Television Producers Association (AMPTPP).

But when contacted, Nihalani denied the meeting took place. “There has been no meeting. The association will not be used to take action against any personal matter.

The people who are affected and have been named in the programme have to sort it out among themselves.

Why should the whole industry get involved in this? If we have any meeting, it will be to decide what steps to take with the media, which is getting stronger every day and creating these explosions.”

Does he think Kapoor is guilty? “No, Shakti was framed. It was a well-laid out plan.

An edited version of the video was shown, in bits and parts. Obviously it was a planned conspiracy to defame him. India TV got so much mileage out of it. Today, everyone is watching a channel nobody looked at yesterday.”

He added, “Of course, the casting couch exists in the film industry. But it exists everywhere — the fashion and corporate world too has it. Kis kispe action loge? Jo pakde gaye wohi chor hai, baki sab sadhu hai?”

Sources in the film industry say the fraternity will now be more careful about what they are doing and whom they are talking to. Says Nihalani, “Of course they will be more scared and much more careful about whom they talk to and what they say.

This is the second time it has happened after the Madhur Bhandarkar episode last year. In the west, everything is planned; they have their own cameras and they give out their own tapes. Now, we will have to take precautions too.”


I have been framed: Shakti Kapoor (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1050704.cms) (Yeah, riiiiight: Meredith  ::))

TIMES NEWS NETWORK[ MONDAY, MARCH 14, 2005 10:44:49 AM ]

 MUMBAI: A day after a television channel claimed to have caught him on camera asking a woman for sexual favours, actor Shakti Kapoor held a press conference at his Juhu apartment on Sunday, saying the tape had been edited in such a way so as to incriminate him.

Kapoor said the incident had occurred over two months ago and the tapes had been doctored.

"The film industry is with me. Govinda and Sanjay Dutt even called me up today to express their solidarity," he said, adding that he was contemplating legal action against the channel in the future.

Kapoor said the woman, who was actually a reporter from the TV channel, posed to be an aspiring actress and had been calling him for more than six months.

"She constantly kept in touch with me either through phone or SMSs for months together.

"Then, one day she booked a room in a five-star hotel and called me over. She kept a bottle of whisky on the table and got me drunk.

"She kept saying that she was willing to do anything to enter the film industry and provoked me. The trap had been planned well-in-advance."

Kapoor further stated that the tapes were finely edited to leave out what the girl had said to him.

"The channel has only played what I said and not what the girl spoke or the provoking gestures that she made. I'm not denying what I said; only that I was provoked into doing it.

"I had gone to the hotel with a briefcase. Why would I do that if I intended something else?" he said.

He added that women who sleep around in their quest to become actresses never gain a foothold in the industry.

"All big names have carved a niche for themselves with their hard work and strong character," he said.

Vote in my poll on this subject.

Woah...
I just hope the truth comes out clear and that the bad guys will be exposed!

as weird as this comment will seem, I'm kinda happy that this is my first "live" Bollywood scandal!
... I mean I've read about Vivek vs. Salman and all those other scandals after they had happenned...

This might be one of the few real scandals.  The other ones have to be made up.

B'wood baddie Shakti Kapoor caught on tape

IANS[ SATURDAY, MARCH 12, 2005 08:15:00 AM ]
 
Sign into earnIndiatimes points
 
NEW DELHI: Bollywood baddie Shakti Kapoor has been filmed purportedly making verbal and physical advances against a young woman and casting aspersions on several film personalities in a sting operation conducted by a private TV channel.


Kapoor did not deny making the advances but maintained he was set up. He claimed he had not made any specific statements about his fellow stars but only spoke in generalities.

The sting was conducted by producer Suhaib Ilyasi for his "India's Most Wanted" programme that has now shifted to the India TV channel.

The 40-minute clip, which was shown to reporters Saturday, will air Monday, Ilyasi said.

In it, Kapoor is seen to be making sexually explicit verbal and physical suggestions to an India TV reporter posing as an aspiring film star.

The reporter is told of various "services" that would have to be provided if she were to make it big.

Kapoor then turns his wrath on Ilyasi and the cameraman when he discovers he is being filmed.

"Kapoor had the choicest of verbal abuses reserved for us when he realised what happened. He threatened us with dire consequences and even said he would stab the girl," Ilyasi said.

"It was a trap," Kapoor told reporters.

"This girl had been in touch with me for close to five months, calling me up in the middle of the night and asking for roles. She even sweet-talked me into meeting her. Any man would fall for this," he claimed. 
 

Well this is not a revelation that casting couch shenanigans happen.  Pretty much any film industry will have it.  But accusing Yash Chopra and Subhash Ghai!  That's kind of like saying Spielberg and Lucas do the casting couch stuff.  I'm not saying Chopra and Ghai have or have not done it, but I'm skeptical.

This Shakti is a piece of work.


From an interview in the Hindustani Times:

On his villainous image

Kapoor says that he is known for his comic roles rather then negative characters. He sung songs and danced in in his films. And raped on screen only one or twice - "Then too I kept laughing. It is so funny to rape a girl".

(even if he's joking, that is soooooo not funny)

Here, he is taking smack about Aish, Priety and Rani--

TV host Suhain Ilyasi on Saturday aired a tape purporting to show well-known screen villain Shakti Kapoor trying to lure a wannabe star with the promise of a role in films. The video purports to show Shakti Kapoor offering his help to the starlet and attempting to kiss her.
Throughout, the girl’s face was not seen. Kapoor was shown in what is said to be a hotel room talking to the girl about how she needed to be groomed before she was introduced to filmmakers. Kapoor is shown telling her that stars like Aishwarya Rai, Preity Zinta and Rani Mukherjee went through the casting couch before they were signed for big banners and dropped the names of Subhash Ghai and Yash Johar.

“You have to do all this if you want to get big names... You need to be groomed for three months and take acting lessons and also lose weight...,” said Shakti Kapoor. We have a number of people trapped (on video) of which this is the first. Soon we will be coming out with details about others in the film industry. On why Shakti Kapoor, when he claimed to have videos of others as well, Ilyasi said this was the channel's decision.

--from the deccan chronicle[/i]

He sounds so skeevy. I wonder what role he would have in casting films anyway, if he's an actor.

Personally for me, the accusation against Subhash Ghai is more believable than the accusation against Yash Chopra. Anyway, he could have just been saying that to enter into the film industry, you have to go through the casting couch. Then only you can get to work with the big banners like Subhash Ghai and Yash Chopra. Will never know.

That probably happens a lot when the very production of films has been so shady and underhanded.

Does anyone else picture Gogo from Andaz Apna Apna when reading this thread?  :)

I commented on this in another topic recently.  Ghai gave Manisha Koirala her first break, and she accused him of sexually assaulting her on the set (see her bio (http://bollywhat.com/Biographies/manisha_bio.html) for the story).  The fact that she went on to become a star -- rather than being ostracized by the industry -- says something.  Of course, one could argue that her refusal to withdraw from the film says something, too.  But then consider the fact that Ram Gopal Varma cast a Ghai-lookalike to play the skeezy director in Naach who comes onto Antara Mali's character...  To quote a renowned sage, "Things that make you hmm!"

The music director character in Satya was also very sleazy.  Was he based on a real person?

Wait...



Hmmm conflicting reports... Once they say Yash Johar (who has in fact passes... why is Shammi bad-mouthing the gone)... then next article they say Yash Chopra....  So who in fact are they talking about? 

-Anna

I didn't know who it was until I googled for him. For all those who doesn't know what he looks like from his name:

(http://images.google.se/images?q=tbn:wGOeOtL28dMJ:http://www.kh.rim.or.jp/~bergamo/hindi/actor/shakti.jpg)
(http://molodezhnaja.ch/asia/shakti_kapoor.jpg)

OK, but is someone really surprised by this? :-\ ::)

Is Shakti Kapoor related to Karishma, Kareena, Rishi, et. al.?

No, he isn`t.


BTW, weren`t there rumours that Salman had a fight with Ghai? Maybe it was because of Aish.

Shakti Kapoor was (not sure if he still is) married to Padmini Kolhapure's sister, Shivangi.  They had eloped way back. 

anyone have an online link to this program??

thx

My wife will thrash Suhaib, says Shakti (http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1278609,00110003.htm?headline=Sexpose:~Shakti's~wife~will~thrash~Suhaib)

Hindustantimes.com

New Delhi, March 14, 2005|13:39 IST

Shakti Kapoor's wife sees nothing indecent about his 'proposal' to a struggler-turned-female journalist on spy cam. "There's complete harmony at home," he says.

The screen baddie, who was apparently caught making promises of stardom to the girl in return for sexual favours, says he was falsely implicated in a sting operation orchestrated by a satellite news channel. Besides an overwhelming show of solidarity from the entire film fraternity, Shakti claims he's proud of the fact that his wife Shibani Kolhapuri and other family members have been unwavering in their support even after the damning video footage was aired on TV.

"At this difficult time, I am happy that my wife is by my side. She treats me as her only God on this earth. She is a typical Hindu woman who is very religious. She sees me as her 'Pati Parmeshwar' and the video has done nothing to change that image. All this false and distorted exposure has not shaken her confidence in me, one bit. In fact more than me, it is my wife who has jumped to my defence. If she has her way, she will go up to Mr Illiyasi and give him a good thrashing.

"Not just my wife, even my children, my sister-in-law and other family members are with me because they realise that what has been shown to people by Mr Illiyasi is completely one-sided. A man who has been accused of the murder of his own wife, who tried his luck in the film industry but failed and who himself has doubtful credentials, is in no position to expose anyone else. He should first look within and then talk about morality and ethics," says Shakti.

According to the veteran actor, there may be several reasons why he was entrapped. "Suhaib was upset with me. He wanted me to work in his film and I refused. He had told me at that time that he would take revenge," he alleges.

Shakti also doesn't rule out political vendetta, since he campaigned for the Congress during the Lok Sabha polls last year. "The tape is forged and there's a complete misrepresentation of facts because a lot of things have been deleted to show that the girl didn't make any moves on me or made any offers. In fact it was she who did everything to provoke me for sex. I am sure some big opposition leaders are involved in the episode and they will be exposed very soon," he says.

Shakti insists he will bounce back: "Everyone is with me and the whole film industry is going to teach Mr Illiyasi a lesson. Many, including Pehlaz Nihlani, Sanjay Dutt, Govinda and Rinku are on my side and we will soon sue those responsible for such wrong deeds."



*** - I don't know why they are calling her Shibani Kolhapuri.  Her name used to be Shivangi Kolhapure.  ::)
 

I guess the articles are pouring in now.


Ban him: Preity Zinta (http://www.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=43207&headline=Shakti~is~truly~a~real~life~villain,~ban~him:~Preity~Zinta)
 
Shakti is truly a real life villain: Preity

Press Trust Of India
Posted online: Monday, March 14, 2005 at 1600 hours IST

Mumbai, March 14: The sting operation by a television channel, filming actor Shakti Kapoor purportedly asking sexual favours from a woman, has evoked sharp reactions from the industry with some denouncing it and others saying the entire industry should not be stereotyped for acts of some persons.

 
In a statement, film director Subhash Ghai, who has been named by Kapoor as indulging in the "casting couch syndrome", said, "these kinds of insane people with such shameful acts, do survive in every segment of the society including cinema.

"It is very sad that people like Shakti project our industry and seniors in such a bad light. I am sure our associations will take action against such acts," he said.

In a statement, actress Preity Zinta, who also has been blamed by Kapoor, said, "this comment is made in a very poor taste and he is truly a person who has no respect for anyone and no honour.”
 
"I am happy to be part of the industry but feel that one dirty fish spoils the whole pond. He is truly a real life villain and deserves to be banned from our film industry as there is no place for him here," she said.

Condemning the way the sting operation was conducted, director Sawant Kumar Tak said, "had the actor been caught luring an innocent victim, it was understandable. But having a journalist pose and enact a drama is different... it appears to have been staged to trap him".

However, on Kapoor's statement about the rest of the industry indulging in casting couch game, Tak said the entire industry could not be blamed for one individual's deeds. "Shakti Kapoor does not represent the entire industry," he added.

"It is unfair on part of the media to blame the industry. A sensible director would not indulge in this because he cannot afford to put his entire career, reputation and work at stake for a single night stand," he said.

"Moreover, how can the media trespass into private spaces? What the channel has done is wrong," he said.

Director Mahesh Bhatt said blaming that the entire industry is indulging in casting couch is erroneous.

"I would be naive if I say there was no casting couch. However, the truth also is that the major bulk of the industry does not indulge in it. There are people who use their position for some gains but to say the entire industry did it would be wrong," he said.

"Also it would not be right to selectively embrace some people who make us proud and ampute the other," he said referring to statements disowning Kapoor.

He also opposed sting operations aimed at "catching eyeballs" and boosting TRP ratings.
 
 

 :P

Someone actually believes this?

Many doves are crying right now, at this blatant loss of innocence! :P

Anyway, I think Shakti Kapoor is a terrible person, and I hope all of his accusations are just his defense mechanisms, and not the truth...:(

I think his wife should watch Aitraaz and inspire herself from Kareena!

If he's telling the truth, then his wife must be missing her brain.

I'm disappointed to see Sanjay Dutt sticking up for him--assuming, once again, that Shakti is telling the truth.

HAHAHAHAHA! Hilarious, LilAni! :D

Well, the casting couch exists- that's for sure. But who knows what's the real truth or not behind his accusations against the other actors/actresses/directors. However, since he's been caught on tape, I'm sure Shakti Kapoor is surely guilty.

What a awful thing that goes on in Bollywood....

Whether or not it is true about Shakti Kapoor, he still disgusts me when he comes on screen..

You can tell it is obvious that Ghai and Chopra plays a bit of casting couches. Also Mahesh Bhatt.. You should check out the archives in Filmfare magazines... It also talks about the actresses who were part of it also.. Such as Karisma Kapoor, Preity Zinta, any of those Item girls...

 >:(

Video

http://www.desitorrents.com/forums/showthread.php?p=339761

http://www.bwtorrents.com/index.php?a=topic&t=14003

I am gone for a few days and look what happens.

I wouldn't be surprised if most of the "powerful" in BW engaged in this, but Shakti really did put the kybosh on his career.

GreenBear,

My thoughts exactly. I finally decide to give BollyWHAT a break after days of constant checking for new threads. I spend some quality time with my boyfriend's mum, casually log back in, and BOOM, land smack in the middle of what seems to be one of the biggest of this year's scandals in bollywood!

I can't wait to download the clip from torrents and see for myself ( I know this sounds disgusting, but trust me I want to do it so I can check up more on this whole 'she's framed me' thing ). Though honestly, I don't see what is so horrifying about the framed thing. Cops do it all the time to catch criminals...does the fact that they're cops and not the actual criminals they're posing to be, make the target criminals any less guilty?

Wouldn't it be horrible if the goodie goodie girls like Ash, Preity, Rani, all turned to have used the casting couch to climb their way up...I just don't want to believe this. I find it easier believable about all those new girls we have nowadays, all the item number girls, and the girls who do the "bold" movies.
But not all is what it seems....you never know...but not Ash, for heaven's sake?!

Rani had a long climb.  I interpret that to mean she turned down the easy roles.  Ash was Miss Universe, so I think she had lots of selling points and too much dignity to beg.  But where you don't have factors like those, there is reason to have some suspicion, esp. if the actress jumps right into exposing to jump start her career.

Who truly knows who became famous because of the casting couch, but I'm sure you are well aware of BW's connection to the underworld.  Not saying the two are directly correlated but if BW films can be funded with dirty money and if even prominent stars have been involved with the underworld, the casting couch also probably exists.  Beneath the facade of glamour and romance often exists a dark and unpleasant reality.  We don't know our favorite stars, and they often turn out to be unlikeable people.

Looks like Shakti embarrassed even the guys

From Mid-day:

Industry divided over Shakti
   By: Upala KBR
   March 15, 2005
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 
POOR ROLE MODEL: Shakti Kapoor with son Siddharth at their Juhu residence
The villain of films is truly in the dock today. Shakti Kapoor has been banned from acting in films by members of the Producers’ Guild of India.

At a meeting held by the Film and TV Producer’s Guild of India, a decision was unanimously passed, advising its members against engaging Shakti Kapoor for any of their film productions.

Out of 170 members, only three were present at the meeting — Amit Khanna, Yash Chopra and Subhash Ghai — who took the decision to ban Shakti Kapoor and conveyed the decision to Supran Sen, secretary general of the guild.

But the industry is divided over the ban. A few people in the industry want to show solidarity with Kapoor, but do not want to take on the might of Ghai and Chopra.

An angry guild producer asks, “How can three members take a decision? A minimum of seven members have to be present to take any decision.” But, according to Amit Khanna, president of the guild, “There is no such rule.”

Says Sen, “In such emergencies, the senior members can hold such a meeting and have the decision passed. And it is a ruling that all members respect and follow.”

What were the grounds for the ban? “He (Kapoor) has maligned personalities who have made a huge contribution to cinema and social causes, and established heroines. Today, everybody has come to know.

After this what will be the image of these people?” asks Sen.

Ghai too affirms, “It was a collective decision to take action against a member of the fraternity for his irresponsible statements.”

“Trapping or exposing acts of one or a handful of persons doesn’t represent an industry or fraternity, whether it’s entertainment, sports, politics or business communities.

It’s high time we realised and took responsibility to create the right perceptions in people’s minds, with a complete view of any industry, than by individual acts belonging to that industry,” Ghai continues.

When asked if the ban was permanent Khanna says, “Nothing is irrevocable. Let’s see how everything unfolds. We felt outraged with what we saw and this is what we felt we had to do. It was a message to all concerned.”

What will happen to the 15 films that Kapoor already has under production? 
What the fraternity has to say...

David Dhawan
It’s very unfortunate what has happened. I feel bad for him as I know his family and children very well. Usne galti ki hai but let’s not hang him for it. Time is the healer. Everything will be washed away with time.

Mahesh Bhatt
He is hundred per cent guilty but banning him is not the right thing. Banning is a knee-jerk reaction. I am against what he did. Shakti should own up and apologise but neither is the problem that big nor are we so clean that we can take such a decision.

The decision is arbitrary and taken by a handful of people, ‘A’ grade producers. We are like a big family and Shakti should be treated as a member.

Mukesh Bhatt
Banning is a drastic decision and that’s no good. The decision is rash and arbitrary.

Whenever it’s something that the industry has needed we have never had a single, united stand. This saddens me. One body looks with contempt at another body’s decision. I don’t like this segmented approach to every issue. Why can’t the industry be unanimous?

Farhan Akhtar
I need to know something more about this incident before I can comment on it.

Guild Bans Shakti Kapoor

Statement issued by the producers’ body

The Film & TV Producers’ Guild of India condemns the slanderous, mischievous ad unsubstantiated aspersions cast by the actor Shakti Kapoor in a ‘Sting’ broadcast on India TV.

All members of the Guild are eminent and respected Producers who have never indulged in any acts imputed to them in the said telecast.

Shakti Kapoor has been completely irresponsible in his behaviour and utterances and must publicly apologise to those whom he has insulted and slandered.

The Guild would like to clarify to all concerned that all its members who represent the cream of the Entertainment Industry have always stood for the highest moral, ethical and professional values and have been the fountainhead of the growth of this vibrant industry.

The Guild would also like India TV in particular and media in general to clearly state that none of the persons mentioned in the expose have in any way ever been involved in any reprehensible acts.

The Guild is advising its members not to engage Shakti Kapoor for any work in any of their productions.   

Issued by The Film & TV Producers’ Guild of India Ltd.

— Supern Sen
Secretary General

Kapoor’s apology letter

Shakti Kapoor has sent a handwritten letter of apology to the guild yesterday. The letter states, “To whomsoever it may concern, this is to the entire film industry.

I, Shakti Kapoor, say sorry and apologise if I have anytime hurt anybody. I have been misunderstood. It was the entire network’s aim to frame me.” Taking the names of Yash Chopra, Subhash Ghai, Rani Mukerji, Preity Zinta, and Aishwarya Rai he adds, “Yash Johar was like a father to me.”

Kapoor adds, “I, Shakti Kapoor, need your support to stand by me in the industry because I have been framed. But if I have hurt anybody please forgive me.”

His films on the floor

- Bold
- We Are Friends
- Teri Meherbaniya Part II
- Meri Life Mein Uski Wife
- KC Bokadia’s next with Govinda
- 2 films with Priyadarshan
- Rafta Rafta
- A film with Parth Ghosh

More to come

A source from India TV said that Kapoor is not the only big fish to be targetted. He revealed that two other actors — one, a yesteryear superstar, and the other a hugely popular television host — have also been exposed.
 
 
 

Oh, no...... this is shady, shady, SHADY!  Only THREE members, out of 170?  And two of the three just happened to have been named by Kapoor as guilty of using the casting couch?  C'mon.  They now look guiltier than they did before. 

Add to that the fact that every director not named by Kapoor is expressing ambivalence or displeasure at his being banned, and what you've got here seems like a pretty obvious indication that he was telling the truth.  Mahesh Bhatt, etc. are condemning him for having screwed up, gotten caught, and spilling the beans on other people, but I suspect they don't support the ban because they see it for what it is: a hypocritical move by people also guilty of such practices to save their own good names.

This is all speculative.  But it does seem to me to be the only way to interpret the article.  If Kapoor had been lying, wouldn't more people have shown up at the guild to support the innocent and the slandered?

I'm depressed.   And kind of disgusted.  Three people.  Three people!  >:(

Who is Amit Khanna?

Could it be the other 170 have been using the casting couch TOO? ;)

So even if Kapoor is speaking the truth, 3 people can ban him from acting forever?? Their behavior seems too insecure for me to believe in their integrity.

The guild, the mafia and politicians probably keep bollywood's behind the screen activities a big secret. Anyone who speaks out might be doing so at the risk of their career ($) or even their lives.

Well, we know for a fact that the media doesn't spill everything it knows. And in some cases, it hasn't really tried to know.

I know!! This is exactly what I was thinking. Seems like a big cover up to me, let's ban Shakti before he speaks too much, and if he reveals too much after this, we can always say he is being revengeful.

I'm afraid that not many people in the industry will speak against his banning, nobody wants to upset Chopra and Ghai. Don't they run the biggest production companies in the industry?

But what do you think about Shakti's claim that he was framed? I'm sure it's all on film that he did ask for sex, or hinted at it, but if this journalist has been after him for quite a while, making it clear that she is willing to do anything.....can we really blame him for this? I am not saying it's allright. In an ideal situation he would have declined the girl, but he is also human. Am I making any sense?  ::)

http://www.rediff.com/movies/2005/mar/16shakti.htm

'Did Shakti think about his family?'

Subhash K Jha | March 16, 2005 15:26 IST

Barely 48 hours after news channel India TV ran the story on Shakti Kapoor soliciting sex from a journalist posing as an aspiring starlet, an SMS joke on the scandal have started making rounds.

The joke: The meteorology department has clarified that the tremor felt in Mumbai on Monday afternoon was not an earthquake. It was Shakti Kapoor's wife beating him up!

While the story has opened up a Pandora's Box, with India TV Editor-in-chief Rajat Sharma promising more exposes on other Bollywood biggies, the after-effects of Kapoor's conduct on camera is being felt by his family.

Says a friend of the family, "For the channel, it was just a big story. But for Shakti Kapoor's family, it is a matter of shame. His wife Shivangi, sister-in-law Padmini Kolhapure and brother Pradeep Sharma come from very respectable families. The scandal has shaken them. Shakti Kapoor's son has stopped taking phone calls. He doesn't speak to his close friends since the story broke."

No one knows how Kapoor intends to get out of the mess he is in. The decision taken by Yash Chopra, Subhash Ghai and Amit Khanna on behalf of the Film & TV Producers Guild Of India to ban Kapoor from working in films further complicates the picture for the harried actor. It also raises questions about journalistic ethics and boundaries.

Says Amit Khanna, "Frankly, the larger issues about invasion of privacy and the casting couch don't really concern us at this point of time. What we are really concerned about is the way Shakti Kapoor cast aspersions on the morality of some of the most respected names in the industry. We can't allow that to happen. It is wrong and we have therefore asked members of our Guild not to work with him."

Does that include the whole film industry? Says Khanna, "You could say that. By damning such respected members of the industry, Shakti Kapoor has alienated himself from the industry. He will have to tender a far more sincere apology than he has done so far. But regardless of his conduct, Bollywood will survive. It can't buckle under one man's wrongdoing. The industry should learn to be more careful about its public conduct. The paparazzi is here to stay. You never know when and where a camera is watching you."

Should Kapoor have been 'trapped' into propositioning the correspondent? Says Khanna, "We cannot go into journalistic ethics at the moment. What we can say for sure is, nowadays the means seems to justify the end. And that goes for the media as well."

In his apparent eagerness to score points with the 'aspiring starlet', Shakti Kapoor made the error of rattling off the names of film bigwigs claiming they had used the casting couch to enter the industry.

Most of those he mentioned have chosen not to react to his remarks.

Karan Johar, who is currently in London, was upset, but reticent. "Let us not dignify the incoherent ramblings of a pathetic man with a reaction," he said.

Rani Mukerji, who was named by Shakti Kapoor, has also maintained a dignified silence.

Says a colleague, "Did he think even once about the damage he was doing to his family?"

For those who don't do torrents:

http://rapidshare.de/files/860651/shakti-kapoor.zip.html

He says Yash Johar, not Chopra.  (Which makes me happy.) 

Kapoor; "Aishwarya met Subhash.  Rani met Yash Johar.  And Preity..."

Journalist: "She met?"

Kapoor: "Again Johar's. She had to just do it once."

Bleh.

I think his wife should watch Ek Hasina Thi and inspire herself from Urmila. ;)

For some reason I too feel better thinking it was Johar and not Chopra. I don't know why.  :-\

As for the actresses, it feels more like he's grabbing at the first names he could think of. I really don't think Rani would have needed to do this, with her family connections. And Aishwarya was Miss World, for goodness' sake. The only one who seems at all likely to have done this is Preity, and I don't think she did. She debuted in a Mani Ratnam film and won Best Newcomer Performance. I don't see the need for these ladies to do this.

It does seem more likely though that a bunch of today's item number girls are doing this. So many of them are not talented, barely  beautiful, come out of nowhere and return to nowhere just as quickly.

I read it will be Rajesh Khanna (no surprise here ::)) and Aman Verma.

IA, Fireball. Honestly, I don't know what to think about this but I believe the casting couch exists. However, why choose the top three actresses? I doubt Preity would ever do something like this. Remember her comments about a guy's flirting with her? She'd give him a tight slap! Aishwariya is the most beautiful woman. Why would she need to sleep her way to the top? She has what it takes to get to the top without contaminating her reputation. Same thing with Rani. Rani is a good actress. She has struggled her way to the top. If she used the casting couch, she would have been promoted big time when she first came into the industry.

In a way, I do think Shakti was being framed because the woman is a reporter. However, I don't understand how this came about...I mean, was he drunk when he said it? Why attack the biggest names in BW?

I don`t say Shakti speaks the truth but IMO you shouldn`t see stars in general as people who are what they are only because of hard work. Just because they give political correct interviews to please their fans doesn`t make them saints in real life. The thing is, the 3 actresses have a very clean image. Also, being beautiful doesn`t make you successful or gives you film offers automatically.

Rani's father is Ram Mukherjee, a director. Her cousin is Kajol. I didn't say anything about her hard work, I'm saying her family connections probably got her through. I totally doubt any skeeveball in the industry would ask Esha Deol to sleep with him for a role, since she's Hema Malini's daughter. I think industry wallahs at least have that much respect for one another.

I just watched the movie...did Shakti Kapoor say : They had to do it just once. Girl: What? Shakti: Fuck.

Is that what I'm hearing?

Seems like he was drunk, and trying to talk the girl into this, by giving examples of who else has done it and made it big.
So he named the top actresses and the top directors....which aspiring actress won't fall for this.
And he seems drunk to me....is it ethical to get someone drunk and get such statements out of him?

With my post I was reffering to the other two actresses, since I had the same thoughts about Rani as you have...her connections are very good. My point is more that we shouldn`t have illusions about the private lifes of our favourite stars, it can lead to big disappoinments.

Actually, I don't think Rani was really so well-connected when she started out.  Definitely she was better off than Random Girl On Street would be, but her dad wasn't a lasting success as a director, and her family ties with Kajol are overrated:  Kajol is her second cousin (as Rani tended to pointedly mention in her early interviews), and the families have never been close.  I clearly recall reading/watching some interview in which she discussed growing up in a relatively modest home and dreaming of being rich and famous, but of never wanting to become an actress; she said her family kind of pushed her into it because they needed $$$.  It must have been a pretty early interview -- maybe a TV interview? -- because she doesn't mention anything of the kind in any of the interviews I can find on google.  (Then again, I wouldn't be surprised if her story had changed as her success grew.)

Actually, I may have seen this when I was in India (maybe back in 1998, right after KKHH came out?), since I'm 99% positive I saw it on TV.  I don't mention it in her bio because, obviously, I have no source to cite...

I feel I need to say something about this whole "Ash couldn't have done, she needn't have, she was Miss World" thingy. Before that, though:

****Disclaimer: I'm not saying Ash is guilty of the despicable act Shakti Kapoor mentioned*****

True, she was seen as "THE FACE" esply after Miss World, but firstly, do remember, she didn't join films till about a year after ( since she would be on the Miss World tour ), and by the time the movies were ready for release, there were other Miss Indias who had become or almost become Miss Worlds as well.

And Ash's debut Hindi movie Aur Pyar Ho Gaya was a total flop. So was the dubbed Jeans. And Aa Ab Laut Chalen. And I also remember reading various bits and articles about her, esply in Stardust, that was really condescending towards her, calling her plastic, a non-actress, someone who had so much trouble dancing that she frustrated her choreographers ( I remember going 'You're kidding! Have you SEEN 'Thoda sa pagla?' ). Also, her enmity with Manisha ( who was quite big then ) was being splashed everywhere.

So she wasn't a media favourite, and having all those flops didn't help. It didn't matter anymore that she was once Miss World and she had a million-dollar face.

She worked on HDDCS quietly, but it was her signing up for Taal with Subhasg Ghai that made news. People saw it as a coup for Ash, since speculation was that he would repeat Mahima after Pardes.

The rest, of course, is history.

Arwen, maybe I'm giving the actresses the benefit of the doubt. However, I forget who quoted Shakti K.'s line, but it sounds like Shakti wanted some and just threw out those names to convince the girl. Also, why pick on the actresses? This sort of thing doesn't go down well in the culture. Blunders, such as this, can ruin their lives and careers completely. I'm not basing my opinions on just hard work, but the actresses mentioned do have morals, unlike some of the new ones we see today. It's like those SRK rumours going around. We don't believe them because they are not true. It just seems like anyone is out to bring these stars down just so they can get to the top. I think that's tasteless.

Is there a transcript of the infamous video? And if so, can someone post it?

That was the first thing that popped into my head when I read about this!! Crime Master GOGO - BUSTED!!!


Thanks for the links to the video.  What was the deal with the sound effects they added after each inflammatory statement of Shakti's?   Good to know that India has fine, quality journalistic broadcasting just like in the U.S.  ::)

Well,  I guess the only good that can come out of all of this is that maybe people who would otherwise engage in similar shenanigans as Shakti's will think twice before doing so for fear that they may get busted too.  Though the way this became revealed - having someone pose as an aspiring actress, encouraging (I assume) Shakti to get drunk, then taping him surreptitiously – has its sleazy aspects too. 

 Yeech.  I think I need to take a shower now.

Thanks for the link, Meredith.  I was having a hard time getting it through torrents for some reason.

So I've just seen it and I can say it doesn't affect my view of Preity, Aishwarya, or Rani.  It did just seem like something he was saying to convince this woman.  I also couldn't help noticing he didn't sound pretty drunk- he certainly wasn't slurring his words, and he was in his senses enough to be telling this story to try and convince the girl to do what he wanted her to as trade for advancing her career.

Also, didn't he claim that they had to f*ck 200 people in this clip?  I find that more than a little hard to believe!


That was hilarious in a way, though.  All they needed was a ''patash'' sound or something like that, and it would have sounded like a low grade BW action flick.  Even though I know the casting couch is a real issue, it still came across as a little comical with the way the ''news'' company played the sound effects, etc.  Clearly they don't really care about the issue enough to treat it in a serious manner, so though I in no way support Shakti Kapoor, I can see truth to his statement that this was merely a ratings grab.

Here's a Hindustan Times editorial on the Shakti Kapoor story.  I don't agree with it, but its an arguable point of view:

I find it hard to take the Hindustan Times seriously when they describe as frivolous something as downright serious as a person in a position of power seeking sexual favours in order to allow one to advance in her career.  It should absolutely go without saying that such a breach of trust, such an abuse of power, is certainly newsworthy.  Especially considering BW is not the only industry affected by this, it is even more serious and of greater concern to the broader community and is certainly news worthy.  I'm still shocked (and disgusted) that the Hindustan Times could say otherwise.  As far as I'm concerned, they've lost credibility for making such a statement.

However, you can't claim to be a serious news company and portray the news you're presenting as a joke, and expect to be taken seriously.  Certainly the news group reporting on Shakti Kapoor did lose credibility in this manner with the silly sound effects they used, and by giving the topic less than the serious treatment it deserves.

I'm curious, why does it make you happy? 

Is it because then Yash Chopra's decision along with Subhash Ghai and Amit Khanna seems more selfless?

But James, considering the frequency that it happens, why suddenly is it Shakti Kapoor who becomes the fall guy?  Let's say, for argument, that it is news. Then it should have been outed eons ago.  Have you seen Page 3 yet?  If you have, you know it can be easy to get your own exposure killed.  That was one of the big points of the movie. Madhvi has this great story with all the documentation she needs to do it responsibly.  She naively thinks she is working for an editor with integrity.  He shows it to the owner. The owner responds "Fire the bitch!"  Goodbye story.  Later, the crime reporter says "Its your fault. NEVER give everything you have to the editor".  Also she tried to expose an important man before understanding his ability to pull strings.

In short, in a society that operates in that way, Shakti Kapoor doesn't qualify as "news" because he is repeating behavior which the powerful have gottten away with for years, fully condoned by all the media.  The only "news story" here is one small failure in the general pattern of self-censorship by the "watchdog media".  That really is what should be in the headlines: "Media exposes unpleasant reality"  For that all the presses should be stopped!

We here in the USA learned that back in the 90's.  After making "All Monica All The Time" the news formula, we learned that Newt Gingrich, Henry Hyde, Rush Limbaugh, and Bob Livingston also used their power in the same way.  And that's kinda the tip of the iceberg.  Monica was news, but THAT big a story?  Not if you go by the extent to which the media covered all the rest of the stories.  No other media in THE WORLD followed the lead of America's media.  If the media were serious in any way about Shakti Kapoor, they'd be outing all the rest of the guilty.  Not gonna happen.

Why shouldn't Shakti Kapoor be the ''fall'' guy?  He did do the crime, so why shouldn't he get taken down for it?  It's not like this has been made up and he's been slandered- the videotape is pretty compelling and conclusive.  If others have gotten away with it due to their connections in the media, that's a sin and should also be exposed, but I don't see how other people getting away with anything justifies allowing Shakti Kapoor to get away with it, too.  What we need is more exposure of people all around, in an incontrovertible way just like this, so the public can hopefully force the hand of the judiciary to take some action.

I don't know how deep the self-censorship issue is, nor have I see the movie you've mentioned here, Sanju_Bhai.  Frankly, though, it seems to me to be confusing the issue to say that because the media picks and chooses who it will expose, that therefore it's wrong to expose a particular person and cause that person to lose face and be condemned.  Ultimately, even if the media is doing a good job, they still have to pick and choose what they will report on and all such cases will never go reported in the public.  Afterall, the time of news programs is limited, and so is their space in newspapers.  Ultimately, the person in question has pretty undeniably done the deed.  So expose him, punish him, show that there are some consequences, and hopefully that will have some effect on others.  Maybe more victims will come forward if they see something like that.  To do the opposite, though, and protect Shakti Kapoor because other fish aren't also getting fried, to allow everyone to go free because the media is complicit in ignoring other cases, sends a message that it's ultimately okay to commit this sort of crime, and that seems to me to be the wrong message to send out altogether.

James:

Hear hear. I wholeheartedly concur.

Simplistically, if you did it, you did it. Doesn't matter if there are others more guilty than you. Just because you're the one who got caught doesn't mean you're any less guilty.

On a different note altogether....I'm hungry

No, I'm still creeped out by the fact that only three people showed to vote, and I still think it's shady that they felt entitled to vote for all 170+ members.  But, since I have a greater attachment to the work of Yash Chopra than I do to that of Johar, I'm simply happy that Chopra isn't the one implicated.  :)  I can re-watch Dil To Pagal Hai without it being shadowed by allegations that the director's a skeeze! 

(Also, I've grown rather accustomed to the image of Chopra that Rachel Dwyer's autobiography painted -- a guy who's a country yokel at heart, deeply devoted to his wife and family, more comfortable sitting at home than at some swanky party, fond of speaking Punjabi and Hindi when everyone else is loudly speaking English, etc. etc..  And the idea of him propositioning his actresses just...didn't fit in with all of that.  It's very naive, I know -- but occasionally it's nice to discover a little naivete inside your jaded old bones. ;))


After watching the expose, I can grudgingly admit that the HT has a point: perhaps this expose does demean investigative journalism.  BUT.  I think what is demeaning to journalism here is not WHAT they were investigating, but HOW they presented the story -- all those stupid sound effects!  It reduces journalism to entertainment (which, granted, is what most journalism is and always has been, but which doesn't fit most people's vision of what it can and should be).  Nor, if the rumors are true, do I respect how they went about getting the story.  But again, I'm not sure if those allegations are true (just as I'm not sure if Shakti was telling the truth about other directors). As James notes, Shakti didn't seem drunk, and just because a woman keeps calling you, that doesn't mean she's begging you to sleep with her.  It might just mean she's begging you for a chance to act. 

So, I think the HT has a point about the presentation of the story but is wrong in all other aspects.  The casting couch does deserve media scrutiny, because it's symptomatic of a broader acceptance of exploitation (I don't add "of women" here -- yet -- because the casting couch is rumored to be active for men as well).  And as far as this editorial goes, I wonder if it is not symptomatic of a lingering stigma against female actresses -- as if a woman who chooses to pursue a Bollywood career somehow cedes the right to pursue that career with dignity and without morally compromising herself.  And this emphasis the HT editor places on "consenting adults" seems like blockheaded logic to me. Adults are exploited all the time; due to various extenuating circumstances, they feel pressured to give in to indignities and injustices.  Just because they're adults and they submit to it doesn't mean that we should refrain from censuring those who exploit their vulnerability.

How about this angle.  The news story isn't true.  Just as if I detailed everything you ever did that was a mistake and failed to acknowledge that (a) that record was actually a pretty good record in the relevant context, and that you were also someone who did a whole of good things, I would be engaged in a deliberate special pleading.  I was knowingly perpetrating a partial truth as objective fact.  That is my main bitch about 90 percent of what I get in the media.  It continually puts forward the notion "We neednt report context.  Truth can be judged without it."  But that's specious nonsense.  Context is everything.  Only people who read non-critically don't ask "What would this look like in relevant context".  Unfortunately, TV has made most people non-critical consumers.

OK, I have now got more or less caught up on this issue.  I am surprised that no one has made the one observation that just jumped out at me:  This is not an "expose", it is entrapment.  Unfortunately, this is a new kick that the Indian media is on, and glorifies it as "investigative journalism" when it is  nothing of the kind.

Our lawyer members can give a more explicit definition, but in the U.S., anyway, entrapment means that the "crime" would not have happened if the inciting agent did not actively encourage it to happen.  Thus, for example, an undercover police officer, posing as a prostitute to arrest potential customers, cannot actually suggest having sex or payment.  If s/he does, then that case gets thrown out of court.  Several major FBI cases were dismissed for just this reason. 

So what has this "expose" actually exposed?  Just that one actor has poor judgement about women.  It's no news to anyone that there is sexual exploitation in the film industry, or in many other industries.  Is the news value supposed to be that the names he named have been "exposed" as participants (either as exploiters or exploitees)?  If so, again, it's not much of an expose since there is no corroborating evidence offered.  (Someone who has seen the tapes can correct me on this). 

As to the actual people he named, it seems as though he picked on big names to impress the pseudo "aspiring actress".  They may or may not be true.  I don't think we have evidence to say either way.  (I'm just curious about Merdith's statement about feeling relieved about Yash Johar, though. If we are to believe all the laudatory comments that poured out when he died, this doesn't seem very likely).  The conventional wisdom about the film industry (not just in Bombay) has always been that there are those who are out to exploit women sexually, but also that there are some, usually the more established producers/directors, who do not make their hiring decisions on this basis.  What is interesting to me in this episode is the rather draconian and swift retribution imposed by the three members of the Producers Association.  That serves more to confirm rather than refute the rumors in my opinion.

The bottom line seems to be that this TV channel is more interested in titillation than actually correcting any social injustices.

Anyway, here's a column about the male casting couch by Shobha De (you decide how reliable a source she is.   Note that she gives no details, either).

wannabe

Sex No Bar
by Shobha De

Copyright © The Week



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Does the male casting couch exist? This was the tantalising question posed to me by a leading daily. My first instinct was to laugh. My next was to answer cautiously. The male casting has existed as long as the female one. The big difference being nobody talked about it. And the reason nobody talked about it was because nobody was really interested in it. The numbers were too small.

Who cared if the odd director took a fancy to the chikna (boyish) young hero or chorus dancer? Who cared if a fancy fashion designer favoured one hunk over the other, because the chosen one was more "co-operative"? Who cared whether a male supermodel sold sexual favours to an ad agency head in return for a prestigious campaign? These goings-on were restricted to the rather rarefied, effete world of entertainment. Fashion, always frivolous, always free, always fun, was the other small world where this reversal was taking place. Shobha De
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Today, the scenario is different. The new (slightly paranoid, but only slightly) perception is that the Alpha Male in the gay community, is taking over and exerting a powerful influence on popular culture. Is that a fact? Is the fear exaggerated? Are there more male than female hookers working the glam-circuit? And is sexual exploitation finally swinging both ways?

I've been actively monitoring this phenomenon over two decades. The good news is that people are now willing to talk about it. The bad? That it's far more widespread than earlier believed. Suddenly, it has become the "Big Topic", "Have you heard?" sort of thing. Of course, we've heard, dummy.

What do you think? The shocked reactions have more to do with the names involved than the phenomenon itself. "My God... you mean him, too?" Yes, my dear, him too. This bothers me. It's almost as if, a young starlet/model/pop singer is expected to make it to the top on her back. Expected to sleep around with influential men, in order to get her breaks and get ahead. But when the same route is taken by a male in the same business, people are aghast.

"How could he do it?" I feel like saying, "The same way she did it."

What is forgotten in the moral huffing and puffing is that at the end of the day, a hustler is a hustler. No gender bias here. Another thing, it's assumed a hungry hunk has to oblige a powerful tycoon, generally a man. Guess what? There are enough female tycoons around to keep those casting couches warm and busy. Particularly in the entertainment world. These women are as predatory as their male counterparts. And equally ruthless. The deals they strike are no different too. Either, the person seeking a favour is willing to play ball... or else, it's "Next, please".

It's equally true that the top four or five commercial film producers/directors prefer boys. They are open about their sexual preference and make no bones about it. If in the old days, bald, paunchy, lecherous studio heads demanded their pound of flesh from young, nubile, vulnerable girls, today, the same fellows (with better gym-toned physiques) are demanding identical service from young, fit, ambitious chaps. How does it matter? At the end of the day, it's (filmi) dhanda (trade) as usual. It was always so. It will remain so. Today, sexual politics do not count. Everybody is fair game, caste, creed, sex no bar. It's happening at the highest levels of business and bureaucracy, too.

More than a decade ago, the scandal that rocked corporate India was swiftly hushed up. Why? Because it involved a legendary figure who had "adopted", nurtured and promoted his beloved toy-boy. It's happening right now in one of the most hallowed industrial houses of the land. But nobody speaks about it. The topic is a taboo. The topic is closed.

However, in the more liberal world of movies and models, the male casting couch has become the topic of animated debate. "He did it with so-and-so... that's why he got the role," is no longer a dirty secret. It's discussed as openly, as easily, as in the old days one would've talked about a starlet's astonishing rise to superstardom in Bollywood.

The MCC (not to be confused with the cricketing body) is here to stay. As much a part of the entertainment world as TRP's. It's just that our "gaze" has to be realigned. No longer are glamorous women alone scrutinised as a piece of meat. It cuts both ways. Suddenly, that awful word "*****" has a new context. Men are whoring, too. Watch out, girls. There's competition.

Wannabe, you raise an interesting point. It is clear that in this sting, Shakti ATTEMPTED to portray power in order to get something.  He may or may not have lied.  But here's the key point.  Did he GET anything?  I haven't heard that he did.  People are arguing that misuse of power is involved.  I argue that no power was actually used  since, so far as I can tell, it never actually worked.  I'm a person with next to no power.  But even I could pretend to power I don't have.  If I got sexual favors by pretending to the existence of this power and it WORKED, would I be guilty of "abuse of power"?  Even if, in reality, I have no power.  Similarly, if a boss says "have sex with me if you want to be promoted" and the underling refuses, at what point has the boss abused his power? If he either got the underling fired or blocked an underling's promotioin, I would say "Power has been abused".  However, if he threatened or promsed, got denied, and never actually USED the power, it seems clear to me that power has not been abused.

Makes me wonder how these issues have been defined in court.

Next targets of the expose!

After Shakti Kapoor its turn of TV host Aman Verma, Producer Pahlaj Nihalani and Rakesh Nath to be exposed in public by India TV. On Tuesday after being with his lawyers for the entire day wrote to the commissioner of police seeking preventive action. Nihalani and Nath too admitted meeting Roy to complain about harassment.

Nihalani in his complaint said that he had been getting calls from a Delhi based girl seeking help from him to become an actress. When he asked her to come and see him in his office she suggested him to meet her at Centaur hotel. Sensing something fishy he refused and asked her to meet him at airport and also took some policemen along with him, realizing this she cancelled the meeting at last minute. Pahlaj also adds that later Suhaib Illyasi the host of the show on India TV called him about the same and recorded the conversation. Nihalani says when Rakesh Nath better known as Rikku in film circles mentioned getting similar calls they decided to meet the Commissioner.

Aman Verma admits meeting a girl at his house and is aware of the soon to be telecasted episode featuring him. Claiming all this as fabricated the actor has already met stars like Salman Khan and Sanjay Dutt to seek support.

At a press briefing on Tuesday about his upcoming film Salman Khan asked India TV correspondent to leave the room before he spoke.

With such high intense drama surrounding the entire controversy, lets see what new turns does it take.



Another case of casting couch comes to the fore

After the case of Shakti Kapoor making advances towards the ‘supposedly struggling actress’, now comes another similar case involving TV star Aman Verma .

In another sting operation carried out by TV channel India TV, Verma has been filmed making advances towards the undercover reporter and also trying to examine her ‘closely’.

The film shows the undercover reporter calling Verma naughty and he responds by saying, “I am always naughty”.

But when Verma discovers that all this is a sting operation, he first justifies his actions saying that casting couch exists and everybody does it and then falls at the feet of Suhaib Illiyasi sobbing.

But before this film was shown on TV by India TV, Verma, known for his role in serials like `Kyunki Saas Bhi Kabhi Bahu Thi' and `Devi', has filed a criminal case of blackmail and extortion against Illiyasi and India TV Editor-in-Chief Rajat Sharma.

The complaint has been filed with Mumbai police, advocate Dipesh Mehta, representing Verma said.

According to the complaint, Verma was constantly being telephoned by a girl named Ruchi for past several months. On December 17, the girl came to Verma's Lokhandwala residence and initiated a conversation with him. After some time, the girl suggested that they should move to the bedroom.

Once in bedroom, the complaint alleged, the girl made suggestive advances and requested Verma to get her some role. Verma, however, rejected her advances and suggested to her that she should try harder for roles through honest means.

While he was escorting the girl out of the house, Verma saw Illiyasi at his door along with a cameraman, who claimed that they had caught him on tape in a "sting" operation. Since that day, Illiyasi and Sharma had been allegedly telephoning him for favours, following which the actor on Wednesday filed a complaint.

When contacted for comments, Illiyasi termed the allegations as "totally wild and baseless".

He said "after the Shakti Kapoor expose, people who have committed wrongs in the past, are apprehensive that they too would be exposed in the coming days and are therefore taking pre-emptive steps.




Someone has more informations about that (I`d like to know who it was)?

Oh ,that happens to me all the time.  Girls are always saying "This conversation would be SO much more interesting in the bedroom".

Oh, wait, that's in my dreams.  Sorry.

Which is clearly entrapment.

wannabe

I don't know about the legal definitions, but this is the point, of course.  All the cautionary tales about women being "ruined" by trying to enter the film world are about the many people with no power who exploit women by promising something that they can't deliver.  And having once been "ruined" in this way, the women find that they have no option except to keep on giving such favors, since the word will have now gotten around that they do this, so everyone else (who may not have thought of this on their own)  demands such gratification before giving them a chance.  Or not.  Actually, the main moral of such stories is not that every woman in films is promiscuous, but that providing sexual services doesn't get you anything.  But it is seldom interpreted that way, especially by eager young things dazzled by the glamor.

wannabe

Here's a question to ponder.  Is it moral for a woman to say "yes" to something her family value system says is wrong in order to gain an advantage.  What I'm saying is that if the request by the man is wrong, does that make the agreement by the woman right?  If she does say yes, is that a "news story" too?

There is an implication in all this that this request or any such request compelled a woman to do something she didn't want to do.  I know put in a similar position, I would simply say no.  The reason I would say no is that no reward is worth abandoning my standards.  That is precisely what I did do many years ago when I was a new supervisor and came in to work to find a note with a performance review telling me to deliver a performance review to an employee, which had been written by a previous supervisor who was fired for many sorts of misbehavior on the job.  I simply refused to do it, citing the fact that it was based on falsehoods.  I would rather have lost the job.  Faced with that, the management told me to rewrite it according to my view of the facts.

Doing something with a loaded gun to your head is compulsion.  Doing something as a conditiion of getting a movie role is NOT compulsion.

You know what...it's funny how people are defending the girls and getting on Shakti.  I'm not saying I believe Shakti.  All I am saying is that if the girls were let's say Bipasha, Mallika, or Amrita Arora - girls who aren't "innocent" on screen.  I bet everyone in a heartbeat would say "no wonder they are portraying that image."  But when it comes to other girls that has an innocent presence on screen, everyone is saying that Shakti is lying. 

The Rediff Interview (http://www.rediff.com/movies/2005/mar/17minter.htm)  / Rajat Sharma

'We've many big names lined up for exposes'

March 17, 2005

(http://im.rediff.com/movies/2005/mar/17rajat.jpg)

Shakti Kapoor changed from a reel-life villain to a real-life villain overnight when he was filmed soliciting sex from a journalist posing as an aspiring starlet.

The sting operation was aired on India TV on Sunday, March 13, and Kapoor has already faced much flak from the film industry.

India TV Editor-in-chief Rajat Sharma tells Subhash K Jha why he decided to expose Shakti.

It's being said you chose Shakti Kapoor to expose the existence of the casting couch in Bollywood because he is an easy target.

The casting couch existed for decades. We didn't. Ours is a fledgling channel.

The film industry has refused to acknowledge it (the casting couch). They say, 'Girls come and offer themselves to producers.' Even now, the industry is not willing to face the truth about the casting couch. We have shown them the mirror. Now it is up to the industry to look at the image or break the mirror.

But the casting couch is a cliché. No one forces the newcomers. They do it willingly.

Maybe. And we are going to look into that. For us, Shakti Kapoor isn't the issue. We are aware of the relevance of the casting couch. We plan to expose them shortly. We've recorded many such encounters, and we will be using them by and by.

The idea wasn't to make Shakti Kapoor a scapegoat. We just wanted to sound an alarm about the casting couch.

We are sorry if the expose has hurt his family. But it was Mr Kapoor's behaviour post the sting operation that was deeply offensive.

You know, he physically fought with our correspondents. Then he said sorry. He kept swearing at the girl. He threatened the producer and reporter. We decided to show what he was doing. And when he decided to hold a press conference, we were the only ones to telecast his lies.

We at India TV completely dissociate ourselves from his delusional statements.

Our idea isn't to damn Bollywood. Lekin ek machli poori talaab ko ganda kar deti hai (but one fish dirties the entire pool).

The 'casting couch' is just a term. What concerns me is the exploitation of newcomers in the industry. Big stars like Aishwarya Rai, Preity Zinta and Rani Mukerji know how to handle themselves and have come up the hard way.

I am concerned about the thousands of girls from small towns who want to become Aishwarya Rai and don't know how to go about it.

Even the smallest of towns have beauty parlours promising to make girls Miss World and Miss Universe. They all feel if Priyanka Chopra from Bareilly can make it, why can't we?

These hapless girls are an easy target.

But stories like yours has shut the door to newcomers.

I don't agree. How can the film industry move forward without newcomers? I like what Hema Malini said about newcomers. She cautioned newcomers to never go unescorted to meet producers, never run away from home and to take the family into confidence. This was the note of caution we wanted to strike for female aspirants.Two weeks ago you had done another sting operation showing a bunch of politicians f**********  in a hotel room with prostitutes.

Is this to win TRPs for your fledgling channel?

Not at all! This kind of sleazy expose isn't our USP. What can we do if people notice them and not Swami Ramdev or Maneka Gandhi doing socially relevant programmes? We'd be very happy to have a viewership.

At the same time, when people say we are doing it for TRPs, I'm certainly not apologetic. If I don't work for the ratings of my channel, who will?

Everyone does exposes for TRPs. Everything on television is for that. India TV is not for my private viewing.

When we launched our channel, our slogan was Badle Bharat Ki Tasveer. We want to play a role in changing the face of India.

Whether it's a sadhu or star, we'll expose whoever is caught with their pants down.

The government says it wants to clamp down on explicit footage on news channels.

The government has been talking about this for long. But if viewers can watch Kanta laga and other sleazy videos, our exposes are relatively inoffensive.

But potbellied netas with prostitutes?

We were careful with the footage. What we showed wasn't even a fraction of what we shot. We have hours of footage. Sex in hotel rooms is a primary concern for us.

We've got to know that honeymooning couples in hill stations are shot secretly in hotels and then used for pornographic videos. Our reporters are working on the story.

What's your next level of expose on the film industry?

I can't reveal that on record. But we've recorded several exposes on the film industry.

We'll look at the casting couch from various angles including girls who throw themselves on producers.

In the fashion industry, we have those regular striptease sessions where male models are exploited by male fashion designers.

There is rampant sexual interaction in the entertainment business.

That's true. And we'll be exposing it.

India TV now has people's expectations to live up to. I know our exposes will caution our potential victims. But we have public support.

For the Shakti Kapoor story, we received 70,000 SMS messages in the first two days! Every minute there's an e-mail coming in.

The expose has made me more responsible towards the public. Our rival channels are already up to their old tricks, paying cable operators to blank out India TV. But we are fully geared up to face the challenge.

My biggest strength is my fearless team.

Do you feel sorry for Shakti Kapoor?

I would have been if he had been repentant.

I sympathise with his family. We didn't want to hurt his children.

But you can't make an omelet without breaking eggs. It's so sad.

He's probably seen that Fox used this ramp to achieve major status.

If the TV network execs are sincerre about wanting to help newcomers, do a series on how the big stars actually got there.  Show the newcomers how much hard work PLUS luck it takes to become their icons.  That should screen out anyone not prepared to trust their luck and work.

Will it happen?  No.  The networkwalla don't trust they will keep an audience with that.  Or get the headlines they get when they entrap Shakti Kapoor.

I can't speak for the others ApunBindaas, but when you see the video it's pretty clear that he's just saying it to influence the girl, there's no evidence or substance to what he's saying.  I would agree with you that more people would be likely to believe that Bipasha, Mallika, or Amrita Arora did such a thing, but I'm not one of them.

Frankly, even if the women he mentioned in the film did use the casting couch to achieve their fame, I still hold the men responsible.  They should have been able to achieve their career on merit, not on sexual favours, period.

More generally, on the issue of "entrapment":

I'm sorry, but I really don't care if the man was "entrapped".  If he wasn't a pig who was willing to sleep with women on the pretext of being able to do something for their careers in the first place, there could have been no possible "entrapment".  Legally there might be issues, but this wasn't the police doing this but the media.  He's been shown for the slime he is at the very least.  And the idea that unless he had the actual power to block a woman's career from advancing unless she gave him what he wanted means this is not an abuse of power, is something that I have a hard time even taking seriously (eg someone pretends to be a cop and then in some way takes advantage of you...not a real crime since they weren't a cop and didn't have any real power, I suppose?!   :o). 

I'd join anyone here in saying that the news company didn't go about this the right way, that their treatment of the topic makes a serious issue into a mockery, but to question whether such work should even be done, to go as far as to deny that this topic is even newsworthy, is mind-boggling...

I think its a mistake to look at cases like these as "sympathy vs. no sympathy".  We don't ascertain the path of greatest justice for sentimental reasons.  We do so because any standard becomes a double edged sword that promises to cut us in the future.  We don't want to establish a rule that says the media has the right to set people up and call it "journalism".  Journalism reports the news, it doesnt create the news it wants.  Journalism doesnt report half truths pretending it is whole truth.  Civil liberties aren't just for nice people.  Once it is accepted that unfairness is "ok" so long as one doesn't appreciate the personal qualities of a person, subjective judgments are in control, and there's no way to predict the next victim.  It is presumptuous to assume such treatment only catches up with the morally repugnant.  Over history, the record is that the virtuous are the most customary victim of such arbitrary rules.  So please lets not turn this into a question of "whom do I sympathize with?"  Because that's a red herring.

What civil liberties were destroyed here?  This was a media company who filmed this, not the police.  There were no civil liberties infringed upon that I'm aware of.

And what half truths are we talking about regarding how the media handled this?  The media company made it clear from the beginning that they had a lady who pretended to be interested in having a career in the industry, that she approached Shakti Kapoor to get into the industry, and then taped him stating that she'd have to sleep with him to get aid to advance her career.  They couldn't lie about how they went about doing things because that was on the video cassette as well.

It is not presumptuous to think that had Shakti Kapoor been a decent human being, he would not have fallen into the trap of this media company.  Had he been a decent human being, and had she made some reference or suggestion to her performing sexual favours for his aid in advancing her career, he would have been offended and stopped having anything to do with her.  Instead, Shakti Kapoor continued on, and told her she would have to sleep with him for his help.  On the cassette she didn't seem to be suggestive to him in anyway- perhaps it had been edited, who knows.  Either way, though, if he hadn't been susceptible to it, he wouldn't have fallen into any trap.

I agree that this should not be about who gets sympathy.  It was actually because it seemed that those who came to Shakti Kapoor's defence were doing so out of sympathy for him that I made the statements that I did.  Whether you agree or not with how the media company handled the situation, the video tape ultimately speaks for itself, and nobody was holding a gun to his head when he stated she'd have to ''f*ck'' to get his help to advance her career.  With that being the case, I honestly don't understand why anyone would even try to defend him.

Bollywood lends support to Verma (http://web.mid-day.com/news/city/2005/march/105789.htm)
   By: Upala KBR
   March 18, 2005

Aman Verma
It’s an unprecedented show of support and here’s how it all happened.

On Tuesday, when Indian Idol host, Aman Verma’s name first cropped up in the India TV casting couch sting operations, the first person he called was actor Salman Khan.

According to sources, Salman called him over and advised him to file a police complaint and offered the services of his own lawyer.

Speaking exclusively to Mid Day Verma said, “Meanwhile, I decided to hold a press conference at my residence in Pali Hill, to give my version of the story. But within a couple of hours, everything changed.”

Apparently, buddy Salman was on the phone with Bollywood biggies, and in a matter of hours, directors Yash Chopra and David Dhawan, Congress MP Govinda, actors Shah Rukh Khan, Salman Khan, director Farah Khan and producer Sajid Nadiadwala have all decided to come together and lend their support, in what is an unprecedented show of solidarity.

Now, the press conference will be held at Mehboob Studios, where also on the agenda may be a discussion of issues like invasion of privacy and whether guidelines should be laid out for the media.

Verma affirmed, “All these people have come together to help me and express their faith in me as a person and my character. I have loads of support from everyone. I have been made a scapegoat by the channel just to boost their TRP’s. Salman has truly been a huge support system for me.

Also lending support are Salman’s brothers, Sohail and Arbaaz, Sunil Darshan, Raj Kanwar and Arjun Rampal.

“Last night, Shah Rukh called me and wanted to know about the whole incident. When I told him he too promised to come,” said Verma. Sanjay Dutt is also being roped, say sources.

Are my English skills deserting me.  I was trying to explain why this superficial "He did it, he should suffer" is too glib.  In that analogy I  mention why we defend civil liberties of people we don't like.  To me its a straw man to say "where are civil liberties in this story?"  A civil trial may indeed establish that civil protections were viiolated and thereby answer this question, but don't pretend I raised it.

If you want to know more about the people behind this "sting" operation, here are a couple of articles I got from talkbollywood.  Unfortunately the original source is not given, though it is clear they are press reports from somewhere.

wannabe

Ilyasi’s first sting: Ma-in-law
Soni Sangwan
New Delhi, March 17, 2005


SUHAIB ILYASI is no novice in the sting business. Before he caught Shakti Kapoor and Aman Verma on camera, he had used the same equipment for a more personal sting operation — to prove his innocence in the dowry case filed against him by his mother-in-law Rukma Singh.

After Ilyasi's wife, Anju, allegedly committed suicide in 2000, Rukma Singh said that Anju had been forced to take her own life because she was being harassed for dowry.

Ilyasi, who had attained fame for his TV programme India's Most Wanted, was arrested. In jail, he found himself among some of India's most wanted men — some of whom were there courtesy tip-offs received from viewers of his show.

"I went through hell at that time. My mother-in-law made up the dowry charges to bargain with me for the custody of my daughter Aaliya. Using the same hidden camera, I caught my mother-in-law and sister-in-law admitting that the dowry allegations had been cooked up to force me to give up Aaliya. Though the charges were of dowry harassment, the media accused me of murder and wrote about it with a lot of masala," he says.

But after coming out on bail — the case is at the evidence stage now — his second innings with India's Most Wanted began — quietly at first. Then came the stings.

"I was returning to Delhi from Mumbai last September when I met this girl at the airport, says Ilyasi. “She talked very bitterly about her experience in Mumbai and cursed everyone. After speaking with her I began to research into her allegations. After talking to several strugglers, I found that some names were coming up repeatedly.”


Ruchi will hold press conference soon
By: Hemal Ashar
March 18, 2005
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ruchi, the journalist from India TV, who has Bollywood men quaking in fear after the casting couch sting operation, will soon hold a press conference in Delhi.

A crime reporter working with Suhaib Ilyasi, the man who supervised the sting operation, Ruchi (incidentally, not her real name) will brief the media on her side of the story over what precisely happened when she met Shakti Kapoor, Aman Verma and a host of other Bollywood biggies, posing as a wannabe entrant to the film industry.

Said Ilyasi, “The press conference will be held to clear the air and allow Ruchi to present the facts. She has not been seen in the footage and by appearing before the media, all the queries that people obviously have, can be answered.”

He added that there had been reports that she acted suggestively and spoke lewdly.

“She has done nothing of that sort. If she had, then this entire mission would be baseless,” said Ilyasi. “In fact she only told the actors that, ‘I need support. I believe you support newcomers’. That is not lewd,” he added.

In fact, continued Ilyasi, “When we planned this sting operation, we were not going to use a journalist, but a real-life struggler who was trying to make it in the film industry.

We approached many girls but everybody refused saying they’d never get any work in the industry if they did that. It is then that Ruchi came up to me and volunteered for the job.”

For now, Ruchi is back at work with Ilyasi’s Ahliya Productions.

The only difference is that she has been given protection after Shakti Kapoor allegedly threatened her saying, ‘churi maar doonga; tumhe nanga karoonga’ when he realised that he had been caught in a sting operation.

“Yes, she has been shaken by the threats. In fact, that’s one reason India TV is

still debating whether she should reveal herself to the press. Finally, it depends on whether Ruchi feels comfortable coming out in public,” said Ilyasi.

CEO of India TV, Rajat Sharma, confirmed that Ruchi was indeed employed by Suhaib Ilyasi and was not with India TV.

Well, not really...what it indicates to me is that these people know Shakti is guilty, but apparently they are convinced of Verma's innocence. They are probably in a position to know!

http://www.rediff.com/movies/2005/mar/18aman.htm

Syed Firdaus Ashraf | March 18, 2005 18:32 IST

A bunch of prominent Bollywood personalities gathered in Mumbai on Friday to champion the cause of Aman Verma, the latest target of India TV's exposes. Their support culminated in a dramatic press conference.

Venue: Mehboob Studio in the northwest Mumbai suburb of Bandra.

Cast: Salman Khan, Sanjay Dutt, Govinda and Arbaaz Khan.

Directors: David Dhawan, Pahlaj Nilhani, Suneel Darshan and Raj Kanwar.
   
The Accused: Aman Verma.

Reason: In defense of the television star after India TV caught him on camera with a girl named Ruchi, who allegedly laid a casting couch trap for him.

Judge: The Public.

Action!

Salman Khan:

Last night, I could not sleep. My mother came and told me, 'Soja Salman nahin to Ruchi aayegi (Sleep Salman, otherwise Ruchi will come)!'

Who the hell is this Ruchi? What does she do? Where has she come from? What does she look like? Has anybody seen her face? Do her parents know what kind of job she is doing?

I will give you an example of a butcher. If a butcher wants to buy meat, he will not go to any other butcher, but he will buy from his own mutton shop. In the same way, if an actress needs a break in her acting career, then she should not approach an actor or an actress, but producers or directors!

So I strongly feel that Aman is innocent and this is a trap for him.

What wrong has Aman done? Did he unzip his pants in front of that girl? Did he open his shirt buttons?

He didn't do anything of that sort. So how can you call him guilty?

Aman is a 32-year-old bachelor and, if lured by a girl, obviously he will get trapped. This is a well-planned conspiracy to malign him.

If you talk about Shakti Kapoor, I think it is his personal problem and that of his family.

How can they (India TV) take a risk by putting a girl, without any security, in Shakti Kapoor and Aman Verma's rooms? How risky can this be? If they had locked the door then imagine what would have been the consequences! How can they take such risks with the life of a girl?

Why are they doing all this? For TRPs? (Television Rating Points, used to measure the popularity of a television show/channel) It is disgusting.

In my 15-year film career, I have never heard of anything such as a casting couch.

My Verdict: Not guilty.

Actor turned Member of Parliament, Govinda:

India TV is doing these things only to catch eyeballs. Nobody is seeing their television channel, so they are up to such things. They have not done anything that will benefit our youth or our country. They are involved in cheap gimmicks.

I feel if anyone purposely assassinates the character of a person, he is worse than a murderer.

Look at Shakti Kapoor. He took names of some heroines, and India TV telecast this. I think this was in very bad taste. How could they air the names of our heroines? Would they have done so if those heroines were their daughters or sisters?

Who knows? Aman Verma would have married that Ruchi. His lust could have turned into love, and for all you know he would have tied the knot with her.

I feel India TV has misused their power and they have no right to do so. There is a law in our country that everybody has a right to privacy. India TV has violated the law by making Aman's life public.

Verdict: Not guilty.

Sanjay Dutt:

(Dressed in an orange t-shirt, Sanju arrives only to pose for the cameras and throw in his one-liner.)

I am here to show solidarity with Aman Verma.

Producer Pahlaj Nilhani:

What has been done is in very bad taste! Filmwallahs are always helpful if any calamity strikes our country. We are always together in raising funds and doing social service.

India TV had first telecast a sting operation against some politicians of Bihar, who were caught in sexual acts. They could not succeed in getting more viewers for their channels, and therefore they laid traps for film personalities, as they knew this would succeed.

Everybody knows one common fact: If you need a role in films, you need to go to producers or directors and not actors. So why was this girl going to actors and not producers?

Verdict: Not guilty.

Arbaaz Khan:

Have you ever heard, in the last 70 years, that a casting couch exists in our industry?

Have you heard of such a case registered against anybody?

No. Never. Then how come India TV is claiming all these things?

There are far more serious crimes in our country happening than this one. Why don't we try to solve all those problems?

Director Suneel Darshan:

I am here to express my solidarity with Aman Verma. India TV just wanted to make a good story and therefore they exposed Aman in such a way. I don't agree with them.

Director Ravi Chopra:

Aman is a great guy. I feel this is invasion of privacy. I don't think anyone should be judgemental about Aman after seeing these tapes.

Director Raj Kanwar:

I want to know in which period of time has exploitation not taken place. I feel the approach of India TV is not right. People should boycott such television channels. If you want to change society, then highlight some other issues and don't do such cheap gimmicks.

The Accused, Aman Verma:

They have�distorted my words.

The girl asked me, do I look like Karisma Kapoor?

I said, 'Yes.'

They twisted that 'Yes' and used it to their convenience.

I am in this industry for more than eight years. I have worked hard to achieve all these things. I have never used anyone in my life, and will never do so.

What wrong did I do? Did I touch Ruchi? Did I slap her?

India TV claims that I was touching Suhaib Ilyasi's (the director of the show) feet. This is wrong. I never did that. Did you see my face while I am doing so? No, I am not there. The tape is doctored.�

Ruchi was calling me to her hotel but I refused. I called her to my home. If I had some wrong intentions, then I would have called her at night. I called her at 3:30 in the afternoon, and at 3:45, I had to leave for another shoot.

I appeal to the public that they should discourage the motives of such people so that my name should not be tarnished in such a manner.

Appeal: I am not guilty.

Journalists: Questions, questions and more questions.

Celebrities: No time for answers. They have more important things to attend to; they have their lives.

Public: It is up to you to decide whether Aman Verma is guilty or not.

I don't think anyone has mentioned RGV and his long term muses Urmila, and now Antara.

I don't condone Shakti's lying, but OTOH I think that people should be allowed to make their own decisions about what to do with their bodies.  No one has to be a BW star to survive.

I have no clue if Aman is guilty or innocent (nor do I care, there are bigger problems out there than having sex with willing women), but all the celebrities saying there is no casting couch in BW? Come onnnnnn!

I just saw this picture and it struck me as... well halarious...

(http://www.mtvindia.com/mtv/fullyfaltoo/spoofs/mtf/images/meet_the_fockers.jpg)

-Anna

Actually, after reading the rediff article posted by Brindavani, I think it is because Shakti Kapoor named some biggies in the industry of participating in this system that they came down on him.  I don't think  it has to do with their view of his guilt or otherwise.  (Guilty of what, BTW?)

wannabe

"Last night, I could not sleep. My mother came and told me, 'Soja Salman nahin to Ruchi aayegi (Sleep Salman, otherwise Ruchi will come)!'

Who the hell is this Ruchi? What does she do? Where has she come from? What does she look like? Has anybody seen her face? Do her parents know what kind of job she is doing?"

Oh my God, I can't believe Salman said this. Its in such bad taste. How typically chauvinistic...rather than focusing on the issue which is about the casting couch, or even the men who are guilty of it, he attcks the woman, and why the slur? Why the question if her parents know what she's doing? If she's a reporter, what's shameful about it? He makes her out to be some kind of prostitute! Why is the blame suddenly on the woman?

This is so hypocritical. I'm sorry. I seriously need not just a shower but a two-hour bath.

"Have you ever heard, in the last 70 years, that a casting couch exists in our industry?" - Arbaaz Khan

Oh man, DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! >:(

This press conference is just getting me more and more disillusioned with the stars.

Yeah, Wannabe, I agree with you...I think the reason they are coming down on Shakti is because he named names. However, if Kapoor has been using his position in the industry to extract sexual favors from aspiring actresses, I would say that calls for some guilt on his part.

The question with a "sting" is whether its a created media event or  the outing of a guilty party.  Anyone know how to know that for sure?

Sree, Salman is also supposed to have said:

"How can they (India TV) take a risk by putting a girl, without any security, in Shakti Kapoor and Aman Verma's rooms? How risky can this be? If they had locked the door then imagine what would have been the consequences! How can they take such risks with the life of a girl?"

so I think your above condemnation of him as a male chauvinist might be a little hasty.  Besides the issue they were focussing on at the press conference was about India TV's entrapment tactics, although I do think the comments dismissing the casting couch issue were rather laughable, especially Arbaz Khan's.  What, these guys haven't heard of the ongoing case against Madhur Bhandarkar by an aspiring actress?

wannabe

I have little sympathy for Shakti Kapoor.  But I'm willing to reserve some sympathy for future victims that TV promoters will create because they got positive feedback on this one.  Here's a truism to keep  in mind:  "When money is the object there are no limits to what someone will do".  Gravity is implacable and one the slide down the hill starts, it usually doesnt stop till someone COMPLETELY innocent is hurt.

As far as I can tell, the sting is a created media event, in that all the "guilt" that has been proven is that these guys propositioned their planted reporter.  They have not reported any actual actress who has been propositioned by anyone.  According to one of the articles I posted, no actress they approached was willing to come out in the open about this, citing potential adverse effects on their careers.  Well, fine.  It seems to me that in that case a legitimate investigative journalist would keep digging until they found someone who was willing, or come up with some way of reporting this without revealing the identity of the actresses in question, not create a fake proposition situation.  And, as I wondered and as someone asked on another forum, if they really want to do an expose on Bollywood, why not do one on the connections to the underworld?  But then that would take some real guts.

wannabe

When the question was organized crime's influence on movies, Preity Zinta put her LIFE at risk.  Seems to me a problem must be of a somewhat lower order if no actress would risk her chance at lucrative commercial films to go public.  After all, the industry has feminist directors who would gladly turn such stories into a issues-movie.  But maybe these art films aren't attractive to the women who actually have a story?

This is a persuasive point.  The stories so far have not been newsworthy and have not been about the "casting couch" because they have not even dealt with people who would have anything to do with casting -- producers and directors. 

What real struggling actress approaches a powerless actor in hopes of getting a job, when there are so many small-time producers out there to approach instead?

Is it possible there is something they aren't letting out that made them target Shakti Kapoor?

[ What real struggling actress approaches a powerless actor in hopes of getting a job, when there are so many small-time producers out there to approach instead?

If all the rumours going around for years and seen as part of the status quo of the industry is to be believed, actors recommend particular actresses to producers all the time, saying they'll report to shooting only if such and such an actress is also roped in. That being the reason why apparently they are also in a position to use/abuse the casting couch.

Frankly, I guess anyone who's 'made it' a little, would have a little clout, and perhaps the more unscrupulous ones see no harm in using it.

Well, the truth is that Shakti just claimed to have influence.  No one really knows that his claim actually is valid.  And anyway, the network just wanted to get him on camera saying certain words.  Its like the Elimi-a-date or Blind Date. In fact, the description sounds EXACTLY like Blind Date.
*************************************************************************************************

Bollywood says no casting couch in industry after expose by TV channel

Agence France-Presse

Mumbai, March 18, 2005|13:33 IST
 
Bollywood stalwarts Friday flexed their muscle, denying there is a "casting couch" in the Indian entertainment industry as claimed by a private television network following a series of sting operations.

Top Bollywood stars and directors descended on the well-known Mehboob studio here to vent their anger against India TV for broadcasting programmes that purport to have caught popular actors demanding sex from a reporter who posed as an aspiring actress.

Top stars Salman Khan, Sanjay Dutt, actor-turned-parliamentarian Govinda, producer-director Ravi Chopra, David Dhawan, Sunil Darshan and Pahlaj Nihalani joined hands to protest the sting operations, calling them an invasion of privacy.

In the past week, India TV has broadcast footage of actors Shakti Kapoor and Aman Verma demanding sex and making passes at a female journalist whom they met separately.

The journalist, known only as Ruchi, had met them saying she wanted to be an actress.

"These are well planned traps by the channel to malign us and in the bargain increase its viewer ratings," said Khan, a leading Bollywood star and close friend of Verma.

"There is no casting couch in Bollywood. How is it that this reporter Ruchi goes only to actors for roles and not producers when it is well known that it is the producers and directors who offer roles not the actors?"

In the immediate aftermath of Kapoor's sexpose on Sunday, there was an uproar in the Indian entertainment industry with film-makers demanding action against Kapoor.

Kapoor was seen apologising on camera when it became apparent to him that he was snared by journalists in a Mumbai hotel.

The TV station said the exercise was part of an expose on what it said was the sexual exploitation of female debutantes in Bollywood and not a campaign to smear Kapoor, who has starred in scores of commercial films.

After Kapoor's expose, the television station interviewed a number of aspiring actresses with at least two of them pointing fingers at known film-makers, saying they too had made similar demands of them.
 
 

Ha! Ha!  That poster is outrageous!  Very funny, indeed.


Maybe they are using the phase "casting couch" in its most literal sense.  No casting couch, per se - doesn't mean there aren't casting beds, sofas, divans, futons, Barco Loungers, tables, chairs...


Curious why rediff edited that part of Salman's statement out.

I can see why Salman wanted to defend that TV personality given Salman's contentious relationship with the press. It does seem that some of his ire is a little misplaced being directed at the "reporter" rather than the producer of the "news organization."  I use those words with a grain of salt, though, because given the way they presented their "news,"  it's a bit of a stretch to call anyone who was involved with the segment legitimate journalists - muckrakers would be the more apt term.
I mean, those darn sound effects!!!
("Aishwarya met Subhash [***thwongggggg - thump***],  Rani met Yash Johar [***thwongggggg - thump***], "And Preity..." "She met?" "Again Johar"[***thwongggggg - thump***], "She had to just do it once." "What?" "F*ck" [***thwongggggg*** - followed by maniacal laughter].  Just in case you missed the point, they play that particular tidbit again, with different equally evocative sounds effects!) 

However, the piece did bring up an important issue and I would hope that the more respectable news organizations would take it upon themselves to do some serious investigation into this problem that probably is not limited to BW.  Are there any laws in India protecting people from sexual harassment?  If not, maybe if there is a widespread outcry over these abuses, such legislation could be passed.  However it seems to me that most of the stories coming out now are focused on the circus of BW protecting one of its own and whether or not Shakti's allegations are true, not on the actual problem of the pressure to provide sexual favors to further one's career. 

http://sify.com/movies/bollywood/fullstory.php?id=13696544&headline=Ban~against~Shakti~withdrawn:~Nihalani~

Ban against Shakti Kapoor withdrawn: Nihalani
 
 
Friday, 18 March , 2005, 19:11
 
Mumbai: The ban imposed by the Producers' Guild on actor Shakti Kapoor in the wake of a TV expose, where he purpotedly named some actors and directors being involved in 'casting couch', has been withdrawn, said filmmaker Pahlaj Nihalani on Friday.
"The film industry will not boycott the disgraced actor and was unanimous in supporting him as he had been targetted," Nihalani told reporters.

Asked if Subhash Ghai and Yash Chopra, named by the actor, would be working with Kapoor, Nihlani said the two were part of the industry.

Stating that the expose was aimed at boosting the TRP of the channel, Nihalani said the channel had tried to indulge in similar operations by "recording sexual escapades of politicians."

"But since it failed to evoke a response, the channel turned to filmstars as they are famous," he added.

"Who is Shakti Kapoor to comment on the whole film industry when he himself has just 2-3 movies on his hand?" Nihalani asked.

Nihalani clarified that the earlier statement on banning Kapoor was made in the heat of the moment.

"We have always been victims-- be it of the underworld or anything else. Our lives are constantly being played across on newspapers," Nihlani remarked.
 

I just watched the video, and while I do think Shakti Kapoor has been up to no good...IndiaTV certainly comes off as an extremely sleazy, money-and-ratings grabbing channel. That video was in extremely poor taste - no journalistic ethics to speak of - and they were basically trying to plug their own channel as much as possible. I know that if there were more videos that weren't this explicit, I certainly wouldn't believe them.

Another article about Shakti Kapoor not dealing with this scandal. It is about a show MTV Bakra which I guess you might equate to Candid Camera or Punk'd type of shows.

Shakti Kapoor Ko Bakra Banaya! (http://www.indiantelevision.com/tellychakkar/y2k5/february/2feb/news_shakti.php)
Aaiyi Aaiyi O! Tinselville's veteran baddie Shakti Kapoor is grossly upset. Reason? Saturday afternoon, he was targeted, courtesy the MTV Bakra team.

According to Kapoor, "I was doing a photo-shoot at Rakesh Shreshta's studio. Sandeep of Bombay Times called and said that he wanted to interview me. I asked him to come to Shreshta's studio but he said that he had a girl who also wanted to interview me for an Irish paper. So we fixed up the meeting at Lokhandwala's Barista outlet."

Kapoor says that a 'firang' girl (in a backless outfit, say our sources) started interviewing him. "I told her I had no inhibitions talking about sex. The interview went off well. Finally I realised that they had made a fool of me, but by then I had completed the interview," he offered.

"But I am upset. I have used a lot of slang words and gone a bit over the top in the interview. I don't want them to carry it in toto. If they do that, I will sue them for Rs 20 crore. I did not sign the 'No Objection' certificate. The whole joke is in bad taste. It's sic actually. I have a family. My image is at stake if I speak such language on camera," he added.

From what we hear, the girl fooled Kapoor by saying that she wanted to enter Bollywood and could go to any lengths. Did Shakti Kapoor touch her on the shoulder then, by any chance? Didn't the MTV Bakra team pounce upon him then? That's what our sources say.

"No way. I am peeved only because of the sexual content of the interview that I blabbed out," asserted Kapoor.

Well! Can we wait to see this episode?[/i]

---

By the way, the episode will not be seen because as mentioned in a later article (http://www.indiantelevision.com/tellychakkar/y2k5/march/9march/news_shaktikapoor.php)

'Some people never learn. Bollywood baddie Shakti Kapoor's brush with a sting operation on India TV, telecast yesterday, was not the only incident in his diary. Music channel MTV tried a similar gimmick on him in February, two months after his India TV tryst, and the screen villain fell for that trap too, hook, line and sinker.

Bang on! Suhaib Ilyasi says his show plans to trap more film stars in similar fashion
Unfortunately, MTV has not been able to telecast the episode featuring Shakti in its show MTV Bajao'D, as the actor refused to sign the no objection certificate needed to air the footage. In our story last month, Shakti Kapoor Ko Bakra Banaya! we had broken the story of how Shakti had succumbed to an 'Irish journalist's' interview on 'sex'.

Shakti, who has been accused of using his name in the industry to exploit young talents under the guise of shaping their career in filmdom, was splashed all over Rajat Sharma's India TV the whole of Sunday in the Suhaib Ilyasi anchored India's Most Wanted.'

Anyone know any more about this?  I hadn't seen that mentioned in a previous article yet.

Not the one to hold back...here is Shobha De's take on the issue:


http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1056732.cms

World's cheapest trick:


I am no fan of Shakti Kapoor. And I don't know or care to know who Aman Verma is. So, if I'm saying give these guys a break, it's only because I'm sickened by what's happening under the guise of 'investigative journalism'. It is giving journalism itself a terrible name, for it is neither investigative nor is it journalism. It's just a cheap trick. The cheapest in the world. Nothing more lofty than naked voyeurism. These fellows are no better than sitting ducks. One doesn't need to be a Carl Bernstein to "trap" these guys.

Any publicity-hungry amateur could've pulled it off. What "sting" are we talking about? Kapoor is virtually a nobody, nothing more than a fringe player in Bollywood, someone with a terrible reputation on and off screen. It's no secret that he behaves in an obnoxious and offensive manner with anyone in a skirt. Public brawling (combined with overt leching), has become his calling card. Luring him into what was clearly a set-up, is a cake-walk. So, I figure what industry wallahs are shocked by is not Kapoor's semi-coherent, drunken bumbling and bombast, but the fact that he named names. Big names. A few holy cows included. Now that is considered unpardonable in an industry that thrives on chamchagiri and boot-licking.

Had Shakti been caught with his pants down attempting to rape this 'reporter', Bollywood would've dubbed him a bewakoof for getting caught and promptly buried the entire incident. Now that the lid is off Pandora's Box, it's open season. What Shakti said to the girl who'd enticed him into a hotel room close to midnight, is essentially the truth about showbiz. And it's a pity that the villain lost his bluster once he knew he had been framed and issued apologies right and left. I would have regarded him with a modicum of respect had he stuck to his guns and challenged the big shots in the industry to prove him wrong. They wouldn't have been able to, simply because they can't.

Look, the point is, this sort of sexual barter is rampant in every profession. Just last week, one read about three female air force cadets being asked for sexual favours. Corporate India is full of similar stories. A senior supervisor in a national airline is currently under investigation for attempting to molest two new recruits. There are umpteen examples in the TV industry itself, with powerful news editors accosting junior reporters in the newsroom and asking for "oral pleasure" if you please - right there and then. Why pick on as obvious a target as Shakti Kapoor?

If the intention was to uncover a much larger Bollywood racket, then zeroing in on Kapoor was a huge mistake. If you have the guts and means, catch the Big Boys. And more interestingly, the Big Girls. Sexual exploitation these days, isn't a one-way street with women alone as victims. It's happening across the board and across the world. Besides, what's the point calling a sidey screen villain, a scoundrel? Nail someone who parades as a saint (there are any number of them at the top of the dirty heap, in Bollywood). And then we'll get the real picture of what goes on, pardey ke peechay .

As for that snivelling, grovelling Aman Varma, it would be hard to find a more pathetic "victim." When white-washed, demi-gods with carefully constructed images get reduced to falling at the feet of their tormentors, you want to throw up and tell them to get a life. A real one. The casting couch is as old as showbiz itself. Those who willingly lie on it, deserve what comes their way. When Kapoor claims nobody has been spared, he's absolutely right. The girls who refused are nowhere today. That's the way the cookie crumbles in showbiz. But as the old saying goes: Honey, if you don't like the heat, stay out of the kitchen.

Meanwhile, I guess we shall all have to put up with a rash of SMS jokes built around Shakti, Aman and whoever is next. As entertainment, it's tops. As journalism, it sucks..

While I agree with Shobha's opinion, it's kind of hilarious to hear her criticising others for being cheap!  (anyone read her book Starry Nights?!  :))

Well, I don't know, James.  I read her life story a few days ago.  She's the one who made Stardust the attack rag it is today.  So maybe that does give her the right to tell these newbies they are really stepping way over a line.  In her magazine, she'd try to egg people into controversies.  But so far as I know, she didn't then misquote their replies.  She didnt go out to print a story and then print it even when it wasnt there.

India TV went out to MAKE a story.  There really isn't any "news" content in what they broadcast.
So that's like Jerry Springer paying people to fight on his show (my apologies to anyone fortunate enough NOT to recignize the name I just used).

I think you missed my point.  Her work has been just as cheap as the people she condemns.  That book I mentioned is basically smut.  How many times have magazines like StarDust circulated stories that have turned out to be completely untrue?  We've all decried the lies in the Indian media before, and Star Dust is easily one of the most gossipy magazines out there, hands down.

And how did India TV misquote anyone's reply?  We're talking about a video, not print.  In one breath you condemn India TV for making a story, but then admit Shobha De egged people into controversies in her magazine StarDust.  I don't see how you can create a distinction between the two because in both cases we have people manipulating circumstances to create the story that they want.

However, I would grant that she has done a better job attacking stars in BW, especially considering how she is not exactly beloved amongst BW actors/actresses/directors.

Aw, James, you KNOW video isn't reliable anymore.  Like was Forrest Gump REALLY in a receiving line at the White House?  With computer effects hardware and software, I could put you "at the scene" of any crime.  Now there are experts who analyze video to give an opinion whether it is fake or real.  The days of "I have pictures, so you know it is true" are over for many years.  In fact, those of us addicted to Indian movies know "what you see is NOT what you get".

Yes, her work is most definitely lucrative trash, but was the Ashmit Patel story printed in Stardust an untrue story?  No, it was controversy that was sought out.

Anyway, yes, one does get wry amusement when the entertainment industry gets into a civil war.

Trust Shobha De to get her point bluntly across without naming names! ( Big Boys, and parading saints, indeed ).

As for her origins as Stardust editor...true, she started the rag and was at the helm of it for ages, but she is now more known for her weekly columns that are powerful enough to make/break careers. I do agree Starry Nights was no great literary achievement, but her latest "Spouse" (non-fiction) has for the first time received some critical acclaim.

All I'm saying is, perhaps she wouldn't have written something like this, that sounds a little 'holier than thou', if she were still in her Stardust days. I think she knows her words command more respect now, and she can afford to pinpoint without falling flat on her face.

She's an odd one, this Shobha De, I must say ( hey, that rhymes!)

Well, I admit to not having read every single article in this thread so correct me if wrong, but from what I have read, nowhere has Shakti Kapoor denied saying what was captured in that video tape.  He gave excuses like the girl was after him, that she got him drunk, that it was all manipulated out of him for the sake of their ratings, etc.  It was based on Shakti Kapoor's acceptance of this being his actual words by virtue of him not denying it, that I took the videotape as genuine.

I have followed this thread for some time now without commenting, since I don't really know that much about Indian film industry. But as a TV journalist myself, with some insight into film business elsewhere, I would like to add two things.
One, this video clip really is not investigative journalism. It obviously serves a minor TV channel to get a big audience for the first time by shouting "scandal" for the whole world to hear, but that's about it. They show a drunken Shakti Kapoor, bragging about how important he is and how much he knows, to impress that girl. I feel no sympathy for that guy, it is really dumb to do that sort of thing, but whatever he said or did really is no big deal...
because (number two), I think: anywhere else this kind of videoclip would only make people shrug and say: Yeah? What if? But in the fairytale world of bollywood the real people have to behave like fairytale figures?
Casting couches (or other furniture) are everywhere. If nobody heard of them in India before, maybe they did not know or use the word for it? But everywhere are people who use their power to achieve their goal (which may be having sex) and people who use their sexual appeal to achieve their goals (which may be getting a role in a film). But there are also people who are professionals, who do their jobs as good as they can, and who don't do this sort of thing. And I believe them to be the majority, anywhere in the world.

Excellent and succint summary, Ele!  I agree with you 100%.

wannabe

Maybe someone would want to comment on these big stars reacting to how this has happened.  Why do they want to  come to Shakti's defense?  What is in it for them?

But they didn't edit that part of Salman's statement out.



They may have been his words, but it still could have been manipulated.  They could have easily rearranged the interview and taken bits out of context, and with some smooth editing, it would all flow.
Aish "met" Subhash.  Well of course she met him!  He directed Taal.  It's kind of hard to be in a movie without meeting the director, no?  But of course, the video implies something different and the way he denies it makes it seem like the implication is the intent.
However, he was the first in this line-up of "stings"?  The man sort of has a reputation.


So even if he denied the sentiments, he wouldn't have been credible.  Not that I'm saying he is, I'm just saying that his reputation isn't helping him.  Honestly, placed in such an awkward position, I don't think I would know how to properly respond while making myself completely credible either.  (But that's why I'd never put myself in such an awkward position.)

Oops.  I guess I didn't read the article that carefully.  My apologies to Rediff.

Here's some readers comments on the scandal from people in India...(IndiaFM)

http://www.indiafm.com/feature/05/mar/2103shakticomment/index.shtml

The following article from Mid-Day is fascinating.  I don't know how closely people read credits, but years ago I noticed the casting director position was almost always female.  I was never able to come up with a theory what that is.  Now this article suggests one possibility:

Article:

London: Shakti Kapoor, who stands accused of seeking sexual favours from an ‘actress’ who turned out to be an undercover TV reporter, isn’t alone when it comes to adopting the casting couch technique.

The papers here ran a story last month about an acclaimed film French director, Jean-Claude Brisseau, 60, sexually harassing three actresses.

The charges relate to auditions between 1996 and 2001 when the actresses allege the director made them engage in sex acts on film. The initial investigative report concluded that the auditions “could not be justified artistically”.

However, Brisseau has denied the charges, including one of molesting one of the women. He told the daily Liberation that the auditions were legitimate. He added that the filmed tapes “are a key part of my work, because sexual pleasure is an increasingly important part of my work.

These erotic auditions are indispensable”.

The case is now going to court, leading at least one paper to assume that “the casting couch days may not be over”.

They may not be over, but in London it is not often we hear about the casting couch. One reason for this could be that the casting director in my experience is more often than not a hard-bitten but thoroughly professional woman.

For a world-view on the casting couch, I turned to LA-based Jagmohan Mundhra, who dabbled mainly in ‘erotic thrillers’ before he directed Nandita Das in Bawandar.

‘Jag’, who lives in London these days, points out that male directors and producers in Hollywood are so “terrified of being hauled up before the courts on charges of sexual harassment” that the work of picking young actors and actresses is left mainly to women casting agents.

In LA, he discloses, there are a staggering “40,000 unemployed actors and actresses working as waiters or waitresses”. Many would do just about anything to get even “a one line part”.

When the director finally gets to have a “one on one” with the actresses on a shortlist, “the meetings are always conducted in public, say, in a restaurant, with the woman casting director present. This is as much a precaution for the man.”

Perhaps it is also time for Bollywood to put the whole business of casting actors and actresses on to an equally professional basis, suggests Jag.
“For Bawander, I picked 20 people from the National School of Drama — only Nandita Das was the exception,” he discloses.

Jag believes that since all human beings are vulnerable to the temptations of “sex and money”, lessons should be learnt from the Shakti Kapoor’s humiliation: employ a casting director, preferably a woman, and have meetings in public, “never alone in a private residence or a hotel room”.

One characteristic of Bollywood is that even top stars are available relatively easily to anyone who is determined to meet them. “In Hollywood, where they are protected by layers of managers or agents, it is almost impossible to get to them,” says Jag.

Well, Starry Nights implies that Shobha knows a little TOO much about what goes on with the casting couch--if her 'fiction' has any truth in it, that is. The aspiring actress, Aasha Rani, is basically forced to sleep with producers for good roles. She even gets 'prepared' for one encounter which involves a eunuch and petroleum jelly (that scene really grossed me out). How much is real and how much is Shobha's (sick) imagination? Hard to say for us who haven't been there.

Latest interview with Shakti Kapoor..read the end:

Shakti Kapoor: How can I forget Ruchi?

Onkar Singh in New Delhi | March 22, 2005 19:17 IST

Sohaib Ilyasi, the man behind the Shakti Kapoor and Aman Verma sting operations for India TV, has denied the charges levelled by the actors that he used a woman of dubious character to expose them.

Last week India TV aired video footage of the film and television actors acting improperly with the lady undercover reporter, posing as a wannabe actress.

"The girl Ruchi, as we know her on the tapes, has been working with me for the last two years. She comes from a family of journalists. Now, they are flinging charges at her and myself. But that is what you expect from those who have been exposed," Ilyasi told rediff.com

Ilyasi, who shot to fame with the television series, India's Most Wanted, was the anchor for the star exposes.

According to sources, Shakti Kapoor was stung at a wellknown hotel in Juhu, northwest Mumbai.

"We had a lot of difficulty in getting the man to our hotel room," Ilyasi said. "He would call up to say that he is stuck in Ahmedabad and there is no flight. Then he would say that even if it is late, he would come straight to the hotel room. We were waiting for him from 9 pm onwards. It was very late when he came there."

The actors argue that the casting couch exists in print and television studios as well, and Ilyasi says, "Let them say anything. We have exposed them. I am not saying that all those in the film or television industry are bad. Only a handful of them bring a bad name to their profession."

Shakti Kapoor, who is currently shooting for a film called Ek Hi Bhool, bursts into laughter when asked if the title is an oblique reference to the episode. "This is coincidental. This has nothing to do with that episode," he says.

And does he remember the woman?

"Of course! How can I forget her? She is five feet four or five inches tall, has an oval face, beautiful eyes and fair complexion. She looked like a behenji turned mod and did not know fluent English. She spoke in broken sentences. I think she was just picked up for the job." he says.

Shakti Kapoor to act as TV journalist
By IANS
Apr 01, 2005, 09:26


Mumbai, March 31 (IANS) If you thought the stinker by a national television channel had stumped Shakti Kapoor, ruined his career, finished him for life - think again.

Shakti has in fact never had it so good in his profession. "I have my hands full with work. I am enjoying this phase," the actor was quoted as saying by Bollywood Trade.

Director-producer Mahesh Bhatt has now cast him in "Show Business", where he ironically plays the reverse of his real-life character in the notorious sting operation.

He plays an over-ambitious TV journalist who follows sensational stories.

"I don't think it is ironical that I have been offered the role. On the contrary, I'll be able to perform the role better, now that I have been a victim," he says excitedly.

Shakti has also been signed by Deepak Shivdasani, Karan Razdan, Partho Ghosh and Mahendra Dhariwal and is currently preparing to leave for London for another shooting.

© Copyright 2005 by MusicIndiaOnLine.com

Edited to add URL:
http://www.musicindiaonline.com/n/i/hindi/1581/

*SIGH*. Only in Mumbai.

I thought he'd been banned...?

Ok, sorry to come up with this so late, I know I'm a little out of touch.

But after a very casual watching of the video at first, I watched it again more closely yesterday after a dispute with the boyfriend. If I'm not mistaken, the transcript is something like this:

SK: Aishwarya met Subhash. Ghai. Rani met Yash.
Reporter: Johar.
SK: Preity met (???not clear...can someone clarify? ) Adi and Johars. She did it only once.
Reporter: What?
SK: Fuck. She had fuck to all these people ( goodness, great English! )

That said - now that I know all this has quite blown over, and that SK is in fact gaining popularity due to it...I feel the need to say...after all this, I don't think BW has changed an inch. Yes, the way it was done was sensational and self-serving, and wasn't proper journalism. But still...you would think SOME people might want to come out and comment on trying to make things better. But I suppose that's wishful thinking in an industry that will go all out denying the whole thing and shoving it under the carpet, rather than dealing with it.

Whose life has changed for the better in all this, I wonder.

Has anyone heard about it or know about this? If you don't know who i am talkin about, here's a clip, without subtitles, sorry.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Iz1-MrgwHo

And here's the clip of him askin for Sex!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FuVMMq3Qd_s

Sin

There's an existing thread for this topic:

http://bollywhat.com/forum/index.php?topic=3599.0

The last post was more than a year ago, but I don't think anyone posted links to the actual videos  :o

This is a bit late, but someone pointed me to a BBC documentary about Bollywood and the casting couch which people who posted in this topic might find interesting.

http://stage6.divx.com/user/desitv/video/1021594/BBC---Bollywood-Casting-Couch

In some other thread, I had heard he did the same to Mahima Choudhary for Pardes. It was her first film, but she didn't get far after that.

Thanks for that, Meredith, it was certainly an interesting watch.  Who knew that 'co-operating' would entail so much!  And Shakti seems totally unrepentant for the whole thing and actually using it to build up his career- it's such a shame that it could even be used that way.   >:(

Yup, Mahima made a lot of ruckus but that was quickly squashed down since he's such a big director. He's done that with Manisha Koirala (during Saudagar), Mahima Chaudhary, and who knows who else. Wonder if he ever tried that on any of the other heroines that he has worked with.

Yes, I was pretty much taken aback by his reaction as well. But was it just me or did the interviewer sound empathetic towards him? Anyway, his whole whining about being victimized was off-putting and shameless. Shakti's logic of "these girls know what the deal is and they can just say no if they don't want to" is...um...interesting. Not to mention he constantly contradicts himself. The complete lack of insight that this is sexual exploitation at its worst really angered me. Concerning his career: has it really taken off again? that would be the worst.

I too noticed his complete lack of remorse - i felt that yes the interviewer was being empathetic with him.  But that could of been a condition in order to get him to agree to the condition, she has to make it out like she empathizes with his point...i mean he would be a little suspicious of the media  :D  Either way he seemed to take the side that if the girl doesn't want to do it, she can just say no.  But using that method is disrespecting a lot of actresses and making them feel pressure to perform sexual favours in exchange for acting roles.

As for rejuvenating his career - http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0007106/ ...it doesn't seem to be rejuvenated or declined as a result.  It looks roughly the same as when the story broke.  He is in alot of movies from the non-powerhouses yet still significant movies - Bhagam Bhag, Chup Chup Ke, Malmaal Weekly, Tom Dick & Harry, Dosti, Barsaat, Garam & Jurm (years 2005-06).

Thats terrible from Shakti. As said above he has no remorse and he is basically saying:

'Everyone is doing it, so it's not wrong.'.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUosrcfhIKo

I love how Mahesh Bhatt gets all preachy especially after he and virkram passing amisha patel back and fourth.

How do you know Mahesh and Vikram pass Amisha back and forth?

Yeah i doubt they 'pass her back and forth'.  Obviously there was a relationship between Vikram Bhatt and Amisha.

But my perception is the casting couch is for those girls who have neither the money nor connections to get into Bollywood so they have to result to the casting couch - since Amisha has both money and a powerful father, i doubt she needs to resort being passed around for a job.

I recently saw a long interview with Tanushree Dutta accusing Nana Pataker of a lot of things but I can't find it. Any one??

I found this video on BBC's youtube account. Its about the sexual bribery in the industry; women speaking out about it. What are your thoughts about it?


Speaking out about exploitation in Bollywood - BBC
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUosrcfhIKo

It's certainly a time-honored practice on my side of the Pacific in the entertainment industry; I'm not at all surprised to hear about it anywhere else. I'm certainly not one to think that "our way is better no matter what," but in this situation I think the Bollywood model of casting--through relationship rather than Hollywood style through casting agents--could lead to more abuse of this sort. Am I wrong about that?

Anyway, having many friends and family in California means I've had several people I know work in the entertainment industry, and I've never heard anyone say something like, "Oh God, I have to sleep with this guy to get this part." And I would've by now. It's certainly a tactic used by some smarmy people; however it isn't the industry norm the way those women made it sound.

I believe that at some point there was some kind of movement to reform Hollywood casting practices, and that even if it wasn't 100% it was a big improvement.  I think I heard that the reason most casting agents are women is that this makes women actresses a lot safer than when they were men who held all that power.