Shah Rukh Khan’s National Award win sparks debate on X, supporter's AI-generated defence goes viral

The revelation shifted the debate from cinematic merit to the evolving role of AI in shaping public opinion online.

The announcement that Shah Rukh Khan and Vikrant Massey would jointly receive the National Film Award for Best Actor ignited a contentious debate on Indian social media, particularly over Khan’s selection for his role in the commercial action film Jawan. The conversation soon escalated into a broader reflection on artificial intelligence and the authenticity of online discourse after it was revealed that a viral defence of Khan’s performance had been authored by ChatGPT.

The dispute originated with a post by @theskindoctor, who criticised the jury’s decision: “Shah Rukh Khan doesn't deserve the National Film Award for Best Actor for a masala film like "Jawan". Shah Rukh is a good actor; he should’ve gotten the award for films like "Swades", "Dil Se", or "Chak De! India". But not "Jawan". What precedent are you setting by rewarding a messy action film?”

This prompted a compelling counterpoint from the handle @Thread_Sutra, which defended Khan’s performance: “Totally disagree… The National Award is meant for excellence in acting, not just for those who do 'patriotic' or 'serious' films. Shah Rukh Khan delivered an incredible, powerful performance in Jawan, bringing depth, versatility, and mass appeal to the character.”

“Awards should go to those who bring their roles to life—regardless of genre. Let’s not gatekeep talent by sticking to outdated notions of what ‘deserves’ recognition. A great actor shines in every kind of role, and SRK proved exactly that. It’s about acting, not just the subject.”

Ok. pic.twitter.com/W5CAtDzUip

— THE SKIN DOCTOR (@theskindoctor13) August 1, 2025

The post quickly went viral and was hailed by many as a balanced rebuttal. However, in an unexpected twist, @theskindoctor later disclosed that the entire comment had been AI-generated using ChatGPT, revealing a screenshot of the prompt used: “Write a strong counterargument against this.” To this, @theskindoctor replied simply: “OK.”

This revelation shifted the debate from cinematic merit to the evolving role of AI in shaping public opinion online. While some users expressed concern over the increasing reliance on generative AI for personal expression, others viewed it as a legitimate tool to articulate counterpoints.

One user remarked: "Everything everywhere seems like it was written by ChatGPT. What a mockery. I predict it will soon die its own death when everyone will stop believing what’s written or expressed online."

Another, however, defended the use of AI as an assistive tool: “People still don’t know how to use ChatGPT. What are you trying to say here? He replied to your tweet; he solved his main purpose, which was to reply and give a contrary view. That is. Ab bhai, vo ChatGPT use kare ya apne bhai se puche ya Perplexity. Usne apna kaam kardiyaa.”