The Age of the Loud Opinion

Ranveer Allahbadia’s case is just the latest example of how social media has become a stage where everyone feels the need to take a stand—loudly and publicly. Whether calling out or defending, there’s a strong push to have a take, to be part of the discourse, and to signal where you stand. But beyond this one case, there’s a bigger trend at play.

So, what is driving this newfound rush toward spirituality? What makes millions of urban Indians—who live in fast-paced, hyper-connected environments—seek something so deeply rooted in ancient tradition? The motivations run deeper than faith alone.

The death of the neutral stance
Sitting on the fence is no longer an option. If you don’t react, you’re seen as indifferent. If you try to process, you’re accused of playing it safe. Social media has no patience for those who are still thinking every conversation is structured as an instant debate, with pressure to pick a side.

Silence is seen as complicity. Social media demands instant reactions, leaving no room for neutrality.

Insight: Nuance is fading. public discourse rewards bold stances over reflection, forcing people to take sides even when issues are complex.

Judgment is no longer about what was said— but about the person
Controversies don’t remain about a single statement or action; they quickly turn into a moral character assessment. The conversation shifts from “this was problematic” to “this person is problematic,” creating a culture where a single misstep defines someone entirely.

One mistake defines you. Online, a single misstep becomes a permanent label.

Insight: People are judged by moments, not their overall character. The internet rarely forgives, resurfacing past errors to reinforce moral narratives.

Social media loves a crusade
There’s a growing tendency for people to frame their opinions as moral battles—whether it’s about calling someone out or protecting them from being “unfairly canceled.” The tone is not of discussion, but of fighting for justice, making every debate feel like a war that must be won rather than a perspective to be explored.

Debates aren’t about discussion—they’re about winning. Every disagreement turns into a moral battle.

Insight: Conflict drives engagement. Users focus on defending their stance or discrediting others rather than seeking understanding.

The algorithm rewards extemes
Middle-ground perspectives don’t go viral. Posts that are absolute—either fiercely critical or aggressively defensive—are the ones that get the most traction. The internet doesn’t incentivise nuance, making it harder for thoughtful conversations to gain space.

Moderation doesn’t trend. Social media amplifies extreme opinions while silencing balanced perspectives.

Insight: The louder the take, the bigger the reach. Algorithms favor outrage, making radical opinions thrive while thoughtful discussions fade.

 
We are in a time where having a voice is more important than having something to say. Thoughtfulness is overshadowed by speed, and the ability to hold conflicting thoughts is disappearing. Until we recalibrate what we reward, the loudest voices—whether right or wrong—will continue to dominate the space.