Tanmay’s “roast” is neither satire nor comedy and fits more in the category of abuse.
Satire, whether it be abrasive or mild, has a moral dimension and is intended to be corrective of ills perceived in society.
Comedy carries humour and while it might mock it does not scorn a subject.
Abusing anyone is impermissible. What is wrong with Tanmay’s “roast” is not its subject but its content.
The reaction to the “roast” however has more to do with the subject rather than its content. It is an unfortunate tendency in our country to exalt individuals into divinities and this enshrining makes any comment about them sacrilegious.
This cult of personality is but an inversion of Tanmay’s roast and is as bad. Unquestioning praise is as noxious as unadulterated abuse. And it carries as many anti-social tendencies as the former. Both are equally deficient in moral sense.
There being no critical thinking in the condemnation much in the same manner their is no humour in the roast. It is indeed a poor reflection on society which is unfamiliar both with warranted comments and justifiable criticism.