After the Madras High Court dismissed a public interest litigation seeking a ban on ‘The Kerala Story’, several theatres in Tamil Nadu have decided not to screen the controversial movie owing to law-and-order concerns. The Madras High Court did the right thing by not banning the movie because that would have technically been an infringement of the freedom of creative expression. Before the Madras High Court’s decision, the Supreme Court, too, had refused to entertain similar pleas, allowing petitioners the liberty to approach the high court. It is obviously clear that the courts’ decisions are based on technicalities of the law, and not on the nature of content of the film. The line demarcating creative expression, publicity and propaganda is so thin and ambiguous that most of the time it is difficult to tell the difference based on the laid-out parameters. The distinction is usually made on the basis of subjective perceptions which may differ from person to person. The idea of truth, which is different from factual objectivity, meanders in a grey territory. In such a situation, human understanding gains precedence over articulation and its inferences. The denial of the ban by the Madras High Court entailed, in a sense, an element of trust on the audiences. While interpreting the possible impacts of a particular piece of creative expression, we usually undermine the power of audiences. Audiences are erroneously considered as ‘passive’ while in reality they are ‘active’ in nature. Irrespective of their literacy levels, audiences have a great capability of forming their own perception. This is where the grey area between propaganda, publicity and creative expression makes sense. That, in fact, forms the cornerstone of freedom of expression. The grey area allows the audience to navigate through the space and get closer to their own version of things, their truth. Rather than imposing a particular articulation as ultimate truth, all stakeholders must respect that grey area. While the courts played their part well, some of the highly placed political authorities have failed the public on this front. Union Minister Anurag Thakur crossed the extremes in saying that “if they are protesting then they support PFI, terrorism and ISIS." The minister said that 'The Kerala Story' is not just a film. The Prime Minister, too, batted for the film, saying that it is based on a terror conspiracy. He further invoked anti-India plot and alleged the Congress to be supporting the terror elements. Furthermore, the BJP president JP Nadda is reported to have attended the screening of the film in Bengaluru. In the first place, ‘The Kerala Story’ is ‘only a film’ and that too fictional. Secondly, protest against the screening of any particular film for its factual inadequacy doesn’t amount to being support for terrorism. It is highly unfortunate and unacceptable that the most prominent office holders in the country are hell bent on playing communal cards for political gains. Yet another lamentable fact is the race to ideologically own and take side of a commercial endeavour. This, however, has not been an entirely new thing. Cinema is an immensely powerful medium that not only commercially picks up the public mood, but also wields power to affect and change the sentiments on the ground. The BJP, it seems, has fully recognised the power of this medium. Be it ‘Padmaavat’, ‘The Kashmir Files’ or a bunch of other films, the party has been more than vocal in aligning its ideological stand with what can essentially be called a commercial enterprise. The creeping in of this ideological-political bias has disrupted the balance in the grey area discussed above — tilting it more towards powerful propaganda. The space where the audience could have let his/her mind navigate and get closer to the truth is now encoded with prejudice which itself is inimical to the idea of truth. Neither the BJP’s open support nor the fervent criticism by certain political parties has done any good. At best, the political slugfest has generated negative publicity (not completely unanticipated by the film-makers), paving the way for commercial gains. This, in fact, appears to be an emerging winning formula that film-makers are now getting convenient with. Everything said and done, let us trust the wisdom of the audience. Clear-cut disclaimers are needed to guide the audience.