Subscribe
Follow TNM's WhatsApp channel for news updates and story links.
Tamil Nadu Assembly has never had live telecast; previous Chief Ministers M Karunanidhi and J Jayalalithaa did not allow it, MK Stalin allowed the live telecast of the question hour.
But with the Vijay government streaming the entire proceedings live, news channels now have blockbuster content.
Vijay may have quit the film industry, but his political communication continues to borrow from the playbook of cinema: build anticipation, tease the audience, and turn the eventual appearance into an event. This week, the Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) followed this to a tee, ahead of the Chief Minister’s reply to the debate on the demands for grants for the Police and Fire and Rescue Services departments.
For three days before September 7, TVK leaders had been building anticipation around Vijay’s speech in the Tamil Nadu Assembly. The party repeatedly hinted that he would have plenty to say to the Opposition Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK).
When Vijay finally rose to speak on Monday, he departed from his prepared remarks to launch an extended attack on the DMK, delivering a lengthy political monologue bereft of data and answers to the questions raised during the debate. The style was familiar to the millions who have watched him on screen.
The significance of the moment exceeds its cinematic quality. For decades, Tamil Nadu’s voters have only heard reports of what transpired in the Assembly, without direct access to what their elected representatives were saying or doing in the House. With Vijay, the Assembly has now taken a decisive step away from secrecy, turning into a spectacle that translates to large television and digital audiences.
According to estimates, Polimer News recorded around 4.2 lakh concurrent viewers during Vijay’s speech. Puthiya Thalaimurai’s YouTube channel recorded around 1.1 lakh viewers, while its television channel had about one lakh viewers. News18 Tamil recorded approximately 53,000 viewers.
The interest was not restricted to Vijay’s speech. Editors of news channels who spoke to TNM said they continued their live coverage of the Assembly even after Vijay stopped speaking, unless another major breaking news event demanded their attention. Some channels subsequently retelecast the Chief Minister’s speech.
The viewers aren’t restricted to TV screens. According to Assembly Speaker JCD Prabhakar, 30,055 people have attended the 28-day Assembly session in person since the TVK government assumed office.
The numbers point to something unusual: the Assembly, traditionally a rather niche source of television content, has suddenly become a significant viewing event, at least when Vijay is at the centre of it.
The increased visibility of the Assembly is significant in Tamil Nadu, where comprehensive live broadcasting of proceedings has been a long-standing political demand.
The DMK had promised in its 2021 election manifesto to live telecast Assembly proceedings, arguing that people should be able to watch their elected representatives debate issues in the House.
After assuming office, former chief minister MK Stalin reiterated the commitment. However, the government initially cited the shifting of the Assembly to Kalaivanar Arangam during the COVID-19 pandemic as one of the reasons why full live coverage could not immediately be introduced.
From January 2022, the Assembly began live telecasting Question Hour. The Opposition, particularly the AIADMK, criticised the arrangement and demanded that the entire proceedings be shown.
The TVK government’s decision to provide more extensive live coverage has therefore arrived years after the DMK first promised it.
The live coverage of Assembly provides Vijay a direct, uninterrupted route from the Assembly floor to a huge fan base that already consumes his political communication through video.
Vijay entered politics with a ready-made audience. His decades-long career as a film star had created a vast network of fans, many of whom subsequently became political workers and supporters of the TVK.
His political communication has retained several characteristics of his cinematic career. Speeches are promoted in advance, appearances are anticipated, and individual moments are quickly converted into short videos for social media.
Veteran journalist Durai Karunanidhi told TNM that Vijay’s political organisation was built substantially through social media and short-form video, making live Assembly coverage particularly useful to him. Clips of his speeches can be extracted and circulated among supporters, allowing a legislative intervention to acquire a second life as political content on social media.
The September 7 speech demonstrated that possibility. What happened inside the Assembly was simultaneously consumed as legislative debate, television programming, and political content for social media.
Tamil Nadu’s reluctance to provide uninterrupted live coverage of the Assembly has to be understood against the backdrop of its political history.
The House has previously witnessed several confrontations between the DMK and AIADMK, with some descending into physical violence.
One of the most infamous episodes occurred on March 25, 1989, when violence broke out during the presentation of the state Budget. Then Opposition leader J Jayalalithaa alleged that she had been attacked and manhandled by DMK legislators, and that her saree was pulled during the melee. The episode subsequently became an enduring part of the political rivalry between the two Dravidian parties.
There have been other instances of disorder inside the Assembly, contributing to concerns over how scenes from the House could be used outside it for political mobilisation.
Veteran journalist Durai Karunanidhi said the bitter rivalry between the DMK and AIADMK frequently spilled into the Assembly, with confrontations and violence becoming part of its political history.
Senior journalist Bhagwan Singh offered another explanation for the reluctance to expose the House and its political personalities to continuous scrutiny. According to him, former chief minister M Karunanidhi was an exception among Tamil Nadu’s major political leaders in being comfortable with the media and frequently engaging with journalists. Jayalalithaa, he recalled, was far more guarded.
“Jayalalithaa has said that she was not keen to address the media,” Singh said.
He argued that Jayalalithaa was comfortable allowing the public to engage with her carefully cultivated image as a film star and political leader, while keeping her private persona closely guarded.
Bhagwan Singh believes this culture of political secrecy was one of the factors behind the absence of comprehensive live coverage of Assembly proceedings.
According to him, Vijay has made the proceedings live to create the perception of “transparency” and “change”, which his party had promised.
