By Sunil Jena, Editor-in-Chief | The Politics Odia
The political heat in Odisha has taken a new turn. The controversy surrounding VK Pandian and his wife, Sujata Pandian, has intensified after an alleged AI-generated video was circulated on social media.
Following this, BJD’s social media head Amar Patnaik filed an FIR, demanding strict action against those behind the “fake video.” He warned that the party would launch an agitation if the culprits were not arrested.
But this issue is more complex than just an AI video.
Earlier, senior journalist and former BJD MP Tathagat Satpathy, through his newspaper Dharitri, had reported on Naveen Patnaik’s health and how VK Pandian allegedly misbehaved with senior BJD leaders like Ranendra Pratap Swain and Bhakta Das at the hospital. The report sparked discussions and raised uncomfortable questions within the party.
Soon after, AI videos targeting Pandian and his wife began circulating widely on social media. This sequence of events has led to an important question:
- If Pandian had not mistreated BJD leaders, would such reports have been published in the first place?
- If the Dharitri report was false, why did the BJD not officially issue a denial?
- Did the AI video controversy gain traction only because the newspaper report created a fertile ground for criticism?
Instead of addressing the growing dissatisfaction within the party, Amar Patnaik rushed to file an FIR, showing how loyal he remains to Pandian. But critics argue that this loyalty is overshadowing the real issue — the internal unrest within BJD.
This raises a larger debate: Is BJD trying to silence criticism by targeting journalists like Tathagat Satpathy, or should the party first deal with the dissatisfaction among its own leaders before blaming social media content?
The controversy is not just about AI videos. It is about transparency, accountability, and the growing distrust within Odisha’s ruling party.
