How meta humour is becoming Indian advertising's favourite inside joke

Remember those CRED ads? The ones where seemingly random celebrities—think Madhuri Dixit auditioning badly, Anil Kapoor getting furiously possessive about his jhakaas catchphrase, or even Olympic champion Neeraj Chopra playing multiple, increasingly absurd roles—did things hilariously out of character, all while gently mocking the very nature of celebrity advertising? Or perhaps the more recent wave, like the ad playing on cricketer Rohit Sharma's infamous forgetfulness to plug SIPs? These campaigns didn't just sell a product; they sold an awareness, a shared chuckle built on the public's knowledge of the celebrity's persona, quirks, and even their past advertising tropes.

Welcome to the era of meta humour in Indian advertising. It's a trend that's moved beyond a niche experiment to become a prominent flavour in the brand communication cauldron. It’s advertising that knows it's advertising, often breaking the fourth wall, poking fun at itself, its celebrity endorsers, or the very conventions of the industry. But is this self-referential wit merely a fleeting fancy, the "flavour of the season" as one expert puts it, or does it signify a deeper, more fundamental shift in how brands are forging connections in an increasingly noisy, meme-literate India?

This isn't just about cracking a joke anymore. It's about leveraging the vast, readily available digital dossier we all collectively hold on public figures, turning shared knowledge, often gleaned from social media, talk shows, and podcasts, into comedic currency. As Arpan Bhattacharyya, Executive Director - Head of Creative, Copy (South) at Lowe Lintas, points out, "the mystery of the Indian celebrity is disappearing... You’re more aware of their lives and personalities... their quirks, their behaviours, their eccentricities and hence are able to make those references in ads." This shift is forcing a rethink of celebrity endorsements, moving away from the stoic, product-holding poses of yesteryear towards something far more dynamic, self-aware, and, frankly, entertaining. 

The allure of the knowing wink

So, what's fueling this pivot towards meta humour? Is it a carefully calculated strategic masterstroke or a reflection of the cultural water we're all swimming in? The consensus among experts suggests it's a potent cocktail of both.

Romit Nair, National Creative Director at Dentsu Creative Webchutney, views it partly as a "cultural zeitgeist where advertisers are capitalising on the celebrity-driven formula." He acknowledges, "It's the flavour of the season, and it definitely works." However, he cautions against labelling it entirely novel, recalling his earlier work: "Back in my Pepsi days, we used similar tactics—underdog narratives pitting Ranbir Kapoor against a kid or Sachin one-upping SRK was a formula that worked... While the formula itself may have been used before, today, cleverly leveraging a celebrity's unique quirks can inject freshness into the content, making it super entertaining."

This need for freshness is paramount in a media landscape saturated with content. Anuya Jakatdar, Co-founder and Chief Creative Officer at Bare Bones Collective, frames it as a strategic imperative: "Indian advertising's embrace of meta humour is a strategic move to cut through the noise and connect deeply with a savvy audience." In a world where attention spans are fleeting and ad fatigue is real, subtlety often gets lost. "Audiences are tired of same-old celeb endorsements," Jakatdar asserts. "There's also a lot of clutter in their minds. You can't just gently break through it, you have to take a chainsaw to it." Meta humour, with its inherent potential for shareability and surprise, acts as that chainsaw.

The rise of social media and the "influencer economy" has irrevocably changed the celebrity-audience dynamic.  As Mukund Olety, Chief Creative Officer at VML India, observes, "We live in a meme-ified world... even celebrities realise the importance of authenticity and acknowledging their quirks to engage and stay relevant." This creates fertile ground for meta-humour.

Jakatdar elaborates on this parasocial connection: "It's a clever way to tap into the parasocial relationships that audiences have with celebs. They believe they know celebs, and by tapping into a trait that is known about the celeb and turning it into an 'in-joke', this belief is rewarded." Olety echoes this sentiment, describing the appeal as "that ‘wink-wink… ifkyk’ moment that the audience appreciates. The trick is to play on a quirk that enough people know and yet keep it fresh."  

An example of this could be the "Don't Be Stupid Stupid Stupid" by Goibibo featuring Sunil Gavaskar and Rishabh Pant building upon the former's comments on Pant getting out casually in a Border-Gavaskar trophy match. 

Furthermore, there's a growing recognition, perhaps long overdue, of the talent involved. Vinod Kunj, Founder and Chief Creative Officer at Thought Blurb Communications, highlights a practical aspect often overlooked: "Too often, celebrity advertising is used as talking heads... Humour requires a skilled actor and a consummate director. If you are going to hire an actor, it just makes sense to give them a proper script to work with." This move towards better scripting, leveraging an actor's ability beyond mere presence, naturally opens doors for more sophisticated comedic approaches, including self-deprecation and meta-references.

However, Ashwin Parthiban, Independent Creative Director (formerly Managing Partner - Creative at TBWA\India), offers a more critical perspective, suggesting the trend might stem from industry navel-gazing. "I think the trend... is largely the result of echo chambers in marketing and advertising," he posits. "Marketers and creative professionals who spend a lot of time consuming media seem to believe that what they think is popular is also what the consumer finds popular. Not always the case." He questions the long-term brand impact, seeing it more as a play for short-term engagement metrics driven by marketers chasing "virality."

Whether driven by cultural shifts, strategic necessity, better utilisation of talent, or industry echo chambers, the result is undeniable: advertising is increasingly talking about itself and its participants in a bid to talk to its audience more effectively.

Flipping the script

The adoption of meta humour isn't just changing the tone of ads; it's fundamentally influencing storytelling structures and the very process of campaign conceptualisation. The traditional reverence for celebrities, often presented as aspirational, almost mythical figures, is being replaced by a more grounded, relatable portrayal.

"Celebrities were once revered, showcased in a glamorous light," notes Nair. "But with social media, they've become more relatable, sharing personal moments and vulnerabilities. This authenticity resonates with audiences, making it a goldmine for brand storytelling." Tapping into a known quirk, like Rohit Sharma's forgetfulness, instantly creates a narrative shortcut and a point of connection.

This shift necessitates a change in how campaigns are built. Jakatdar confirms, "The way campaigns are conceptualised has already changed... brands are increasingly looking at work that is shareable, has the potential to travel on social media." Given that "brands are naturally wary of shock," humour becomes the preferred tool for generating this shareability. The self-aware, fourth-wall-breaking nature of meta humour is particularly potent in this regard. It invites the audience in on the joke, making them active participants rather than passive recipients.

Bhattacharyya sees this leading to more meaningful integrations. "The fundamental change that I’ve noticed is that now there seems to be more of a connect between the celebrity and the product in an ad. It’s not as random as it used to be," he observes. Instead of a celebrity arbitrarily holding a product at the end, the meta-narrative often finds clever ways to link the celebrity's persona or the self-referential joke back to the brand's message, like using Sharma's forgetfulness to highlight the importance of remembering SIP investments.

Kunj argues that breaking the fourth wall isn't revolutionary in advertising's core purpose. "Advertisers have always favoured the fourth wall," he states. "We are always trying to motivate the audience... persuade them to buy." However, he sees the method evolving. "Self-deprecating humour is brilliant because it humanises the character and the audience sympathises with the person portrayed as a fool. If scripts are being written for that purpose, it's not strategic. It's just common sense." Using an actor's range to play against type or embrace a public perception creates a richer, more engaging narrative than a simple endorsement.

Dream11 created something on similar lines for the 2025 season of IPL. It featured an all-star cast of cricketers and actors drawing upon and subverting their public perceptions.

This approach demands more from the creative process. It requires a deep understanding of the celebrity's public persona, cultural context, and the audience's likely reception. It moves beyond just casting a famous face to crafting a mini-narrative that leverages their existing 'story' in the public consciousness. As Bhattacharyya puts it, "The ability to have more fun with them, often by making fun of them, makes the advertising different."

The insider's club 

While meta humour offers compelling advantages, it walks a fine line. By its very nature, it often relies on shared knowledge and cultural references. What happens when a segment of the audience isn't "in on the joke"? Does this approach risk alienating viewers unfamiliar with the specific celebrity quirk or the advertising trope being subverted?

Most experts acknowledge this potential pitfall. "These campaigns arguably reward culturally tuned-in audiences, but could leave others confused," agrees Nair. The key to mitigation, he suggests, lies in fundamentals: "Choosing a celebrity who genuinely resonates with your target audience makes all the difference," and ensuring that "compelling storytelling and effective writing are essential to keep audiences engaged."

Jakatdar concedes the risk but believes brands often weigh the potential rewards higher. "Yes, brands do run the risk of alienating a segment... But I think in their minds, the reward of pleasing all those who are far outweighs all those who aren't. Plus the hope is that those who aren't in will watch, get curious, find out, and understand the joke." It banks on the intrigue factor pulling uninformed viewers deeper.

Kunj places the onus squarely on the quality of execution. "If the ad is scripted well, it holds its own," he argues, drawing an analogy to film sequels: "You don't have to watch the original movie to understand its sequel, because a good writer will make sure that each film has all the references that are relevant to it. So it's not really a matter of alienating viewers, it's a matter of telling the story in its proper form."

Bhattacharyya emphasises the core idea: "The fundamental starting point for any campaign is always going to be the idea... if that idea is strong, the chances of alienating viewers is lower. What we need to guard against is ads just randomly roasting celebrities—these ads tend to become inside jokes that the larger audience often don’t get."   

Parthiban, however, sees this reliance on pre-existing knowledge as a fundamental flaw, particularly in India's diverse media landscape. He lists the presumptions this advertising makes: "a) familiarity with the context... b) that every viewer... is equally up to date... c) that the language and nuances are familiar... d) that the humour and/or celeb will not completely overpower the brand." In a country with vast regional and linguistic differences and fragmented media consumption via OTT platforms, assuming a universal context is risky. "Skewing everything towards what I recently saw termed as ‘Cred-style advertising’ is a very one-dimensional take," he warns.

When compared to global counterparts like Ryan Reynolds' famously meta campaigns for Aviation Gin or Mint Mobile, the Indian approach exhibits distinct nuances. Nair highlights regional differences within India itself: "Bollywood's style differs from Tollywood's, and southern humour diverges from northern." Effective campaigns require tailoring to these specific sensibilities. Jakatdar perceives a tonal difference: "Global humour tends to be cynical, whereas Indian humour has a warmer touch."

Kunj notes that "Indian advertising is always waking up slowly to global trends," partly due to a "very conservative client pool," although he believes audiences are receptive. However, certain styles, like the "extreme ridiculousness" of some Reynolds ads, might not translate well. "That specific kind of humour may not work in India, which is cast in slapstick and over-acting... Also, I don't believe the Indian consumer would laugh at being called an a**hole." 

Bhattacharyya adds another layer: "With Indian celebrities, you do tend to have a line that you can’t cross. They are okay to make fun of themselves to a point." The reverence, though perhaps diminished, hasn't entirely evaporated. Parthiban dismisses the global comparison altogether, citing the relative homogeneity of Western audiences versus India's diversity.

Ultimately, striking the balance requires careful calibration—choosing the right celebrity, ensuring the core idea is strong enough to stand alone, understanding cultural and regional sensitivities, and knowing just how far the self-referential envelope can be pushed without losing the plot, or the audience.

The last laugh?

Indian advertising has long relied on a familiar toolkit: heartfelt emotional narratives, aspirational storytelling, and broad slapstick comedy. Meta humour, with its layered, self-referential, and often sophisticated nature, feels like a distinct departure. Does this signal a permanent evolution in the comedic language of Indian brands, or is it just another trend cycle?

Nair sees it as part of an ongoing evolution, influenced by global trends and increasingly discerning audiences who "appreciate layered humour." While acknowledging its current popularity, he reminds us that similar tactics were used before (Pepsi), albeit less ubiquitously. He predicts it "could be a comedic language that sticks around for a while, until we move on to something else."

Jakatdar views it more definitively as a significant shift. "It definitely marks a shift," she states. "It's clear that one can neither take its audiences for granted, nor can one underestimate them. It means you can push creative boundaries, and what better news than that for creatives like us?"

Bhattacharyya agrees that humour has always been vital, especially in shorter formats where emotion is hard to land quickly. "Humour tends to land better and be more memorable... And being memorable is fundamental," he notes. However, he injects caution regarding meta humour's specific trajectory. "We’ll have to wait and see how this evolves. Because even now, it can get a little tiring to see certain celebrities pulling the same tropes across brands. A celebrity’s quirk or the roast format can’t become the central brand idea... the real consumer may not keep finding the same joke funny just because it’s being said slightly differently!" The novelty can wear off quickly if not backed by substance.

Kunj offers historical context, reminding us that humour isn't new, citing the enduring success of Amul's topical cartoons: "The brand has been built on humour. It has always been there, surreptitiously in the background." He welcomes more intelligent humour, seeing it as a natural progression. "The nature of entertainment is such that it never stagnates. It moves on to the next thing... We should be using humour, satire and free-thinking to broaden our media output." He sees meta humour not necessarily as the future, but part of a potentially richer, more diverse comedic landscape, provided creatives invest the "hard work" required for intelligent humour beyond "pie in the face jokes."

Parthiban remains the most sceptical about its longevity and fundamental value. He worries about the focus on short-term spikes over long-term brand building. "While this kind of creative rendition may temporarily break clutter, I think it does very little for long-term brand recall or brand love," he asserts. He advocates returning to basics: "'Clever and inclusive’ always comes from human and cultural insight... Humour born of insight will always travel further than a topical guffaw." For him, meta humour, particularly the celebrity-quirk driven variant, is a potentially "short-lived trend" that risks overshadowing more sustainable brand-building strategies.

The rise of meta humour in Indian advertising is undeniably one of the most talked-about shifts in the industry today. It reflects a confluence of factors: a digitally-native audience fluent in memes and irony, the crumbling mystique of celebrity aided by social media transparency, a desperate need to cut through unprecedented content clutter, and perhaps, as some suggest, a touch of industry trend-following.

It has demonstrably changed how campaigns are conceived and executed, pushing celebrity endorsements towards greater self-awareness and often achieving remarkable cut-through and shareability. Brands are learning to wink, nudge, and share an inside joke with millions.

Yet, the path is fraught with challenges. The tightrope walk between cleverness and alienating those not 'in the know' requires skilful writing and strategic insight. Cultural and regional nuances demand careful consideration, distinguishing the Indian approach from its global counterparts. And the looming question remains: is this a sustainable evolution in brand storytelling, or a potentially dazzling but ultimately fleeting comedic style? The warnings against overuse, the risk of the joke overshadowing the brand, and the concerns about long-term impact versus short-term buzz are valid and warrant attention.

Perhaps the true evolution isn't the adoption of meta humour itself, but the underlying recognition it represents: Indian audiences are sophisticated, culturally attuned, and less receptive to the old, reverential formulas. Whether meta humour remains the dominant comedic language or morphs into something new, the need for advertising to be smarter, more self-aware, and genuinely entertaining seems here to stay. The brands that succeed won't just be those who can land a clever, self-referential punchline, but those who, as Parthiban suggests, ground their humour—meta or otherwise—in genuine human and cultural insight. The joke, after all, should ultimately serve the brand, not just exist for its own sake. 

News