Niharika Konidela’s divorce is now official. The news erupted in the media after court papers got leaked even before the announcement. As the issue made to the headlines of all media houses, Niharika made it official and requested sensitivity and privacy from the people as well as the media.
Some obnoxious media houses took offense to this request of Niharika. They started a new argument questioning if one can ask for privacy for divorce when they give publicity for marriage.
They point out how celebrity weddings became marketing spectacles with destination weddings, designer attire, extravagant gifts, and opulent wedding cards. They also mention some celebs selling the streaming rights, pushing the marriage content using PR teams, etc.
Saying all this, they conclude saying that the media should not be blamed for extensive coverage of divorces too. Anything and everything about a celebrity evokes curiosity in the public and media attention.
The attention sometimes turns out to be perks and sometimes as perils of a celebrity. They slowly adapt to it. But there are certain situations in which humans opt to grieve in private. Divorce is such an incident.
Yes, it is unarguably true that celebs market their weddings. But should they celebrate divorces as well as some celebrations? Forget celebs for a moment, even in common people, flaunting wealth and pomp at weddings is quite common.
It is quite common to brood in private in the case of a divorce.
If marriage is a celebration, divorce is like death. We do not celebrate death. If you do Gana Bhajana for a death, people will boycott us socially. It is the same with divorce as well.
Probably, families of these people who say ‘Publicity For Marriage – Privacy For Divorce’ have this culture of celebrating death and divorce like a marriage.
Pavan Kumar Thathamsetty
