As rumors of “hidden agencies” and “manufactured virality” swirl, we look at why the internet is so desperate to tear down a woman in a saree
In the meticulously filtered ecosystem of Instagram, we’ve been trained to recognise certain “types” and “cliches.” There’s the South Bombay aesthetic, the gritty urban hustle, the “authentic” rural creator who usually stays in a lane of farming or cooking, or maybe both. Then I stumbled upon Pujarini Pradhan, known to her 675K followers as @lifeofpujaa.
Clad in modest cotton sarees against the backdrop of a West Bengal village, she shows us her life and just as easily deconstructs ours. From blistering takes on capitalism to nuanced film critiques and feminist theory, her reels are delivered in fluent, articulate English that has left a specific corner of the internet, and several “prestige” creators, in a state of absolute meltdown.
To me, the question currently burning through Reddit threads and influencer “exposure” videos isn’t actually about her content. It’s about her audacity.
Is Pujaa An “Industry Plant”?
Honestly, who cares? The backlash reached a fever pitch in late March 2026, spearheaded by critics like therapist-influencer Niharika Jain. Her argument was that Pujarini’s rise is “too sharp,” her edits “too polished,” and her intellectual depth “too curated” for someone with supposedly limited resources.
The term “Industry Plant” was tossed around with reckless abandon. Critics pointed to her collaborations with Netflix and Audible as proof of a hidden machine behind the saree. I find the subtext of these accusations as loud as it is ugly: How can a girl from a village in Bengal know this much about cinema? How can she edit this well without a Mumbai production crew?
The Gatekeeping Of “Exposure”
The most telling part of this controversy is the claim that Pujarini lacks the “exposure” necessary to have such “immaculate taste.” It’s a classic elitist trope that suggests critical thinking and sophisticated aesthetics are geographical privileges. As one Reddit user aptly put it: “Is she forgetting that the internet exists? It doesn’t take a real-life ‘social circle’… to have tastes.”
I couldn’t agree more. In 2026, the idea that a rural creator needs a “system” to understand global discourse isn’t just outdated but insulting. We seem perfectly happy to celebrate “raw” rural content, but the moment that content becomes intellectual and (heaven forbid) profitable, the witch hunt begins.
Pujarini didn’t take the bait quietly. In a recent Reel, she dismantled the “team” allegations, clarifying that her agency handles brands, not her brain. “They were fine until I started giving my opinions,” she noted. “The moment I started earning money, they felt like I am a danger.”
View this post on Instagram
This, in my opinion, is the real crux of the “Life of Puja” storm. As a culture, we are comfortable with the “struggling” rural woman; we are deeply threatened by the financially savvy, articulate, and self-made rural woman. Why is it so hard for us to digest that someone can be well-read and tech-savvy without living in a metro city?
Despite the skepticism, heavyweights like Archana Puran Singh and Kusha Kapila have jumped to her defense, calling out the blatant double standards. While privileged creators are allowed to “pivot” and “rebrand” endlessly, Pujarini is being asked to provide a receipt for every book she’s read and every edit she’s made.
