The Controversial Video: Dhruv Rathee's Claims and Methodology
The Video Content and Allegations
Dhruv Rathee, a prominent YouTube content creator with substantial following in political commentary and social criticism, released a video making specific allegations about Bollywood actresses' alleged skin-lightening treatments. The video, posted to his YouTube channel, identified multiple actresses by name and explicitly claimed they underwent skin-lightening procedures.[1]
In the video, Rathee specifically addressed Deepika Padukone alongside Bipasha Basu, Shilpa Shetty, Kajol, and Priyanka Chopra, asserting that these actresses appeared darker-skinned early in their careers but subsequently appeared lighter-skinned in recent years. The video presented this observation as evidence supporting claims of skin-lightening treatments.[1]
Rathee's comments, delivered in Hindi, were translated to convey the following assertion: "There's a very long list of actresses who, at the beginning of their careers, appeared to have a slightly darker complexion, but nowadays look much fairer. When they are asked how this happened, they say that earlier they used to spend a lot of time in the sun, but now they don't, and that's why their complexion gradually became lighter."[1]
Rathee then pivoted to asserting: "By the way, some of these actresses also endorse skin-whitening creams. The secret behind fair skin is neither any cream nor staying away from the sun. The reality is glutathione injections, which have become a popular method for skin lightening."[1]
This framing presented Rathee's assertions as representing hidden reality versus publicly stated explanations, implicitly characterizing actresses' explanations as false or misleading.[1]
Methodology and Evidence Presentation
Notably, Rathee presented no scientific evidence, dermatological expertise, professional analysis, or documented proof supporting claims that specific actresses underwent skin-lightening procedures. Rather, the video relied on visual comparison of photographs from different career phases, subjective assessment of apparent skin tone variations, and logical inference that observed differences must result from dermatological procedures.[1]
The video did not address alternative explanations for apparent skin tone variations, nor did it acknowledge limitations of photographic evidence as basis for medical assertions. Professional photographers, cinematographers, and lighting designers are well-documented as capable of substantially altering subject appearance through lighting, filters, color correction, and camera settings without any cosmetic procedures involved.[1]
Deepika Padukone - Biography - IMDb
Deepika Padukone - Wikipedia
Deepika Padukone | Movies, Daughter, Husband, Awards ...
The Fan Response: Unified Defense and Criticism
Alternative Explanations Presented by Defenders
Deepika Padukone's fans and social media users providing substantive responses presented multiple evidence-based alternative explanations for apparent skin tone variations observed across Deepika's career:[1]
1. Photography and Lighting Effects: Multiple users emphasized professional photography's capacity to dramatically alter apparent skin tone, with comments such as: "The lighting helps and editing also happens in Final Cut."** Professional photographers, cinematographers, and editors possess extensive technical capabilities enabling significant appearance alterations without cosmetic procedures.[1]
2. Makeup and Makeup Trends: Defenders noted that makeup application, including bronzer and tanning trends prevalent in 2000s cinema, could account for darker appearance in early career photographs.** One Reddit commenter explained: "I do think the left side era Deepika was into bronzer and tanning. Look at her younger pics, she wasn't thaaat dark. Barely medium skin tone. So she was just likely following the tan fashion trend of the 2000s in few of her looks like Aishwarya did for Dhoom 2."[1]
3. Natural Skin Tone Variation: Users explained that individuals with melanin-rich skin naturally experience substantial skin tone variation based on sun exposure and seasonal factors, a well-documented dermatological phenomenon.** One commenter noted: "Girl just got tanned cuz people with melanin can have their skin tone change like 5 shades based on sun exposure and skin care. I thought avg Indians would know that."[1]
4. Skincare and Sunscreen Routine: Supporters emphasized that improved skincare routines, particularly consistent sunscreen usage, naturally lighten skin tone by preventing sun damage and allowing natural skin tone emergence.** One user explained: "It's just that people start doing basic skin care and using sunscreens... I looked like Deepika's colour 7 yrs ago... now I naturally changed because my true skin came out after doing skincare properly."[1]
5. Camera Quality and Cinematography Evolution: Multiple users noted that camera technology, color grading, and cinematographic techniques have evolved substantially during Deepika's career, enabling different visual presentations of subjects.** One observer stated: "It's just lighting and better camera picture quality. She is not fairer than before. Her skin colour is the same. If you see candid pictures like airport ones you realize that both Deepika and Ranveer are more or less same complexion."[1]
6. Professional Demands and Lighting Control: One sophisticated analysis noted that as actresses advance in careers and achieve greater bargaining power, they can demand favorable lighting and cinematography, resulting in more flattering visual presentations.** As one commenter explained: "Once you reach a certain stage in your career, you can make demands to the camera people/lighting people/director: that you need to be shown in a flattering way on screen which includes the complexion."[1]
Dermatologist Recommended Pre-Bridal Skin Care Treatment
A Guide To Dermatologist-Approved Skin Care | Cult Beauty
Daily Skin Care Routine 7 Steps To Follow For Glowing Skin ...
Contextual Controversy: Timing and Prior Criticisms
The Dhurandhar Film Controversy Connection
Significantly, Rathee's video criticizing Deepika Padukone emerged immediately following his previous controversial video about Ranveer Singh's film Dhurandhar, released December 5, 2025. In that prior video, Rathee criticized the action thriller, describing it as "well-made propaganda" and asserting that sophisticated propaganda filmmaking represents greater danger than poorly-executed propaganda.[1]
Rathee specifically stated: "Well-made propaganda is more dangerous. Films like The Taj Story and The Bengal Films were not dangerous, kyunki wo bakwaas films thi (because they were bad films). But Dhurandhar is an engaging film." This criticism characterized Dhurandhar as dangerous specifically because its quality filmmaking makes propaganda more persuasive.[1]
The timing proximity between Rathee's film criticism and actress criticism raised questions among observers regarding whether the allegations represented continuation of agenda against personalities associated with the film. Deepika Padukone does not appear in Dhurandhar (starring Ranveer Singh), but social media observers speculated whether the actress criticism represented attempt to undermine associated personalities.[1]
One Reddit user observed: "Well he was against dhurandar soo ya naturally he chose the best target," suggesting coordinated criticism pattern rather than isolated artistic evaluation. Others speculated whether Deepika's celebrity status and social media prominence made her convenient target for criticism regardless of substantive evidence.[1]
Director Response and Industry Backlash
Director Aditya Dhar, who directed Dhurandhar, responded to Rathee's criticism by endorsing a journalist's post in Instagram Stories that appeared to criticize "a certain video maker" heavily criticized on social media for negative film reviews. This director response, though not explicitly naming Rathee, publicly affiliated filmmaker with criticism of the video maker's conduct.[1]
The broader pattern of events suggested to observers that criticism of film and actress represented coordinated expression of disagreement rather than independent artistic evaluations.[1]
Dhurandhar (2025) - IMDb
Dhurandhar (2025) - IMDb
Dhurandhar (2025) - IMDb
Broader Social Issues: Body Autonomy, Appearance Scrutiny, and Online Responsibility
Significant portion of fan response emphasized individual body autonomy—the principle that individuals retain absolute right to make decisions regarding their bodies irrespective of public speculation or judgment. Multiple commenters articulated this principle explicitly, with statements such as: "It is her wish. If she wants her skin to be fair, she has every right to get it done. Who the f gave him rights to comment on her?"[1]
This body autonomy perspective holds that even if allegations were true, commentary on and judgment of personal appearance choices constitutes unwarranted intrusion into private decisions. Whether Deepika underwent cosmetic procedures or not, commenters argued, represents her personal choice meriting respect rather than public scrutiny or criticism.[1]
Gendered Appearance Scrutiny Concerns
Several commenters identified appearance-focused criticism as disproportionately targeted at women, reflecting broader pattern of gendered body scrutiny in media and public discourse. One user specifically noted: "Women can do whatever they want," suggesting that appearance criticism represents unwarranted interference with women's autonomy.[1]
Critics of Rathee's video highlighted that celebrities—particularly women celebrities—face constant commentary on appearance, body, age, and choices, creating hostile environment where natural self-image development becomes impossible. The video's focus on alleged appearance changes constituted, in this view, contribution to problematic pattern of gendered appearance scrutiny.[1]
Content Creator Responsibility
Multiple commenters questioned whether content creators should make public allegations about individuals' bodies and appearance without evidence, expertise, or consent from subjects. One user expressed this concern as: "From criticizing a good film to criticizing a good actress. How much hateful is this?"[1]
This perspective holds that online content creators bear responsibility to verify claims before publicizing allegations about individuals, particularly regarding sensitive topics like body modifications and appearance changes. The video's unsubstantiated nature, combined with allegations' personal sensitivity, raised ethical questions about appropriate boundaries for online commentary.[1]
Social Media | Pros, Cons, Debate, Arguments, Facebook ...
Dermatological Context: Understanding Skin Tone Variation
Natural Skin Tone Changes and Factors
From dermatological perspective, substantial skin tone variation is entirely normal and common, particularly among individuals with melanin-rich skin types prevalent in South Asian populations. Multiple factors influence apparent skin tone without requiring cosmetic procedures:[1]
1. Sun Exposure: Ultraviolet radiation stimulates melanin production, darkening skin tone—a natural protective response. Reducing sun exposure through sunscreen usage allows natural skin tone to emerge, potentially appearing lighter as accumulated sun damage resolves.
2. Skincare Routines: Consistent skincare, including proper hydration, exfoliation, and moisturization, improves skin health and appearance. Healthy skin reflects light differently than damaged skin, potentially appearing lighter or more vibrant.
3. Hydration Status: Skin hydration levels significantly influence appearance, with well-hydrated skin appearing lighter and more luminous than dehydrated skin. Dehydration can intensify appearance of darker tones and skin discoloration.
4. Age-Related Changes: Skin composition changes with age, including changes in melanin distribution and light reflection properties. Such changes occur naturally throughout life without requiring intervention.
5. Photography and Lighting Variables: Professional photography employs sophisticated lighting techniques—three-point lighting, fill lighting, light modifiers—enabling substantial appearance variation without subject changes.** Different lighting angles, colors, and intensities produce different visual results from identical subjects.[1]
6. Color Grading and Post-Processing: Digital color correction, white balance adjustment, and color grading enable substantial appearance manipulation during post-production without any subject modifications.** Professional photographers and cinematographers routinely employ such techniques in standard workflow.[1]
Glutathione Injections Context
Rathee specifically mentioned glutathione injections as "popular method for skin lightening," a reference requiring dermatological context. Glutathione, an antioxidant present naturally in bodies, has been promoted in alternative medicine for various claimed benefits including skin lightening, though dermatological consensus remains divided regarding efficacy and safety of intravenous glutathione for skin lightening purposes.[1]
Reputable dermatological organizations have not endorsed glutathione injections for skin lightening, citing insufficient evidence of efficacy and potential safety concerns. However, the treatment remains popular in certain markets. The mention of glutathione in video introduced medical terminology lending pseudo-scientific authority to unsubstantiated claims about specific individuals.[1]
The Larger Conversation: Celebrity Appearance, Media Standards, and Public Discourse
Appearance-Based Criticism Patterns in Celebrity Culture
The incident exemplifies broader pattern in celebrity culture and online discourse where appearance changes—whether from aging, styling, cosmetic procedures, or photography variables—become subject of intense public scrutiny and speculation. Celebrities, particularly women, face constant commentary analyzing perceived appearance changes and speculating about causes.[1]
This scrutiny creates paradoxical situation: celebrities are expected to maintain youthful appearances (pressuring cosmetic procedure consideration) while simultaneously facing criticism if appearance changes suggest such procedures occurred. No approach satisfies public discourse that treats appearance as appropriate subject of public judgment and speculation.[1]
Professional vs. Personal Appearance Standards
The video failed to distinguish between appearance variations resulting from professional requirements versus personal choices. Bollywood actors are frequently required to undergo styling, makeup, and appearance modifications as aspects of professional filmmaking. A young actor in an early career film might be styled differently than the same actor in contemporary roles, reflecting professional choices rather than personal preferences.[1]
Professional lighting and cinematography similarly represent filmmaking decisions rather than personal choices by actors. Conflating professional styling with alleged personal cosmetic procedures obscures this distinction.[1]
The incident highlights importance of media literacy in evaluating online claims, particularly regarding technical media-related topics like photography, cinematography, and image manipulation. Non-specialists often lack technical understanding necessary to recognize how professional photography and cinematography substantially alter appearances, instead attributing observed differences to personal modifications.[1]
Content creators discussing technical media topics bear responsibility to accurately explain media's capabilities and limitations when analyzing visual evidence. Rathee's video presented photographic comparison as definitive evidence without explaining photography's substantial appearance-alteration capabilities, misleading audiences regarding evidence reliability.[1]
Conclusion: Unsubstantiated Allegations and the Importance of Verification
Dhruv Rathee's video making specific skin-lightening allegations against Deepika Padukone and other actresses, without providing substantive evidence or addressing alternative explanations, triggered justified backlash from fans and social media users. The response demonstrated audience capacity to evaluate claims critically and present evidence-based counter-arguments.[1]
Defenders successfully articulated multiple legitimate explanations for apparent appearance variations across Deepika's career, from professional photography and makeup effects to skincare routine improvements and natural skin tone variations. These explanations represent scientifically grounded alternatives to speculative claims regarding cosmetic procedures.[1]
More fundamentally, the incident highlighted the problem of online content creators making unverified personal allegations about individuals, particularly regarding sensitive body and appearance-related topics. The convergence of appearance criticism with prior film criticism raised questions about motivation and agenda, suggesting potential coordinated messaging rather than independent artistic evaluation.[1]
As online discourse increasingly influences public perception, content creators bear responsibility to verify claims before publicization, acknowledge limitations of evidence presented, and respect boundaries around personal commentary regarding individuals' bodies. The controversy surrounding Rathee's video should encourage reflection on appropriate standards for online discourse about celebrities' appearances and the importance of media literacy in distinguishing between legitimate alternatives explanations and speculative assertions.[1]
Citations:
India Today - Deepika Padukone's fans slam Dhruv Rathee for skin-lightening claims in new video (2025); Reddit discussion threads - User analysis of appearance variations and alternative explanations; YouTube - Dhruv Rathee video content and viewer response; IMDb - Dhurandhar film and cast information; Social media platforms - Fan responses and public discourse regarding allegations; Dermatology research - Natural skin tone variation and photographic effects documentation; Photography and cinematography resources - Technical capabilities of professional imaging[1]
Post your opinion
No comments yet.