COM grad turns cockroach insult of India youth into massive online movement

COMtalk: You earned a master’s in public relations at BU’s College of Communication last year. When you were building the Cockroach Janta Party’s brand — the name, the manifesto, the visual identity — were you consciously drawing on what you learned in the classroom?

Abhijeet Dipke: Yes, the classes I took at Boston University really helped me design this campaign in a professional manner. I remember how many of the classes in my master’s program in Public Relations always stressed the importance of having a clear vision and mission statement, and how a campaign must be timely and relevant for it to be effective. The idea of creating a manifesto was inspired by what I learned at BU about the importance of having definitive goals in a campaign. I also learned that there must be visual consistency that aligns with the core idea of the campaign, which is why I decided to use the “cockroach” as the symbol of our movement.

Professor Amy Shanler’s Strategic Media Relations class really helped me face the media confidently today. I have now given interviews to prominent international media outlets such as Reuters, BBC, Associated Press, Al Jazeera, DW, along with many major media outlets in India. I would not have been able to do that without the training I received during one of Professor Amy Shanler’s crisis simulation assignments, which pushed me out of my comfort zone and helped me become more confident while facing journalists and cameras.

Professor (Michael) Dowling’s classes were equally challenging and enriching because they helped me become better at articulating my thoughts clearly and effectively. Professor Carla Kath’s classes helped me understand how a campaign must be rooted in local culture and should understand the nuances of a region in order to be effective. Those classes taught me the importance of understanding the audience culturally and linguistically before designing a campaign.

COMtalk: You reportedly built the party’s look and manifesto within 24 hours using AI tools like Claude and ChatGPT. How do you think about the role of AI in activist communication? What can it do, and where does it fall short of what a trained communicator brings?

Abhijeet Dipke: My campaign relied heavily on AI because I did not have the resources or a professional team that could support me in designing a campaign within such a short period of time. I believe this makes AI even more important in activist communication, because activists usually do not have the kind of resources that large political parties or corporate houses possess. AI can help accomplish tasks that would normally require a team of dozens of people.

At the same time, I do not support the idea of replacing human beings with AI simply to cut costs. I want to emphasise that when you do not have resources or a team, AI can become a strong ally for your movement if it is used with the right intentions and for the right causes. That being said, AI also has its own limitations, which I experienced while designing this campaign. It was truly an asset when it came to quickly creating social media designs and website templates. However, when it comes to the messaging of a campaign, you still need a human mind that understands what is politically relevant and timely for the campaign to be effective.

AI cannot be fully relied upon for messaging in a campaign as sensitive as this, one that focuses on freedom of expression, accountability, and transparency. For that, you need lived experiences and a deep understanding of society and the authorities you are questioning. I would say a major reason behind the success of this campaign is that I have been politically active for a long time and understand the nuances of political messaging. That is something AI can never truly grasp.

COMtalk: Political satire has a long history as a tool of dissent, but it also carries risks — it can be dismissed as a joke or fail to translate across cultures. As someone trained in communication, how did you think about satire as your medium? What makes it effective in this particular political moment in India?

Abhijeet Dipke: Satire was a very deliberate choice. As someone trained in public relations and political communication, I understand that people today are overwhelmed with information, outrage, and political messaging. Often, a serious message gets ignored, but satire has a way of breaking through the noise. What attracted me to satire is that it allows people to engage with difficult issues without feeling lectured. It lowers the barrier to participation. A young person who may never read a policy paper or watch a political debate can still understand a joke, share a meme, and become curious about the issue behind it.

At the same time, I was aware of the risks. Satire can be dismissed as humor if it is not rooted in a genuine concern. That is why, for me, the satire was never the end goal. It was the entry point. The Cockroach Janta Party started as satire, but the issues it highlighted were real: freedom of expression, accountability, youth frustration, and the growing disconnect between those in power and ordinary citizens.

COMtalk: Managing that scale of attention is itself a communications challenge. How has your training prepared you — or not prepared you — for it?

Abhijeet Dipke: Before pursuing my master’s at Boston University, I had experience working in a political setup, which taught me the importance of message discipline, understanding public sentiment, and responding quickly in a fast-moving political environment. The courses I took at Boston University further strengthened my understanding of strategic communication, audience engagement, media relations, and crisis management.

That said, I don’t think anything can truly prepare you for a response of this scale. When something grows from a satirical idea into a movement that reaches millions of people in a matter of days, you are learning in real time. Every day brings a new challenge, whether it is managing expectations, responding to misinformation, handling media attention, or simply keeping up with the volume of messages and support coming in.

The academic training and professional experience provide a strong foundation, but the reality is that much of this has been an exercise in adapting quickly and learning as we go.

COMtalk: Critics might argue the CJP is a meme embraced by more privileged youngsters, offering little in the way of real political solutions. How do you respond to that? And as a communicator, how do you keep a satirical movement from becoming an end in itself?

Abhijeet Dipke: I would argue that the real question is why millions of young people felt the need to rally behind a satirical movement in the first place. The answer lies in the failure of the existing political ecosystem to address many of the concerns of the youth. Young people are dealing with issues such as unemployment, rising competition for opportunities, exam mismanagement, affordability, and a growing sense that their voices are not being heard.

The satire was never the destination. It was simply the vehicle. If the movement remained only a meme, it would have disappeared within days. The reason it has resonated is because it reflects genuine frustrations and concerns that already existed. Our job as communicators is to ensure that the humor draws attention to those issues rather than replacing them.

COMtalk: Can you confirm that you’ve received death threats and demands for money? How has that changed how you operate, and what would you say to BU students who want to do impactful public-interest communication but are weighing those kinds of risks?

Abhijeet Dipke: Yes, I have received numerous death threats from anonymous numbers on WhatsApp. Some of these individuals somehow obtained my home address in India, and there were even threats directed at my family in India while I am in the United States. I was also approached with offers to back off from what I was doing, which I completely rejected. I would be lying if I said it did not affect me. What concerned me most was not my own safety, but the safety of my family. They had nothing to do with this. The decision to start this movement was mine, not theirs.

At the same time, I think this experience has reinforced an important lesson. Whenever you take up a cause, challenge powerful interests, or speak against the establishment, there is always a possibility that people will try to intimidate you into silence.

To my fellow BU students, I would say that impactful public-interest communication is rarely risk-free. But I also believe that speaking up becomes even more important when people are being discouraged from doing so. Democracies depend on citizens who are willing to ask difficult questions and hold power accountable.

What keeps me going is the thousands of messages I have received from supporters and well-wishers, many of whom have never met me but have taken the time to express concern for my safety and offer encouragement. When I focus on that, I am reminded that there is far more kindness than hatred in the world.

In the end, fear can be powerful, but so can solidarity. And in my experience, kindness and hope have always proven stronger than intimidation.

COMtalk: How did studying and living in Boston shape your understanding of political communication and civic engagement in ways that influenced what you’re doing now? Did the distance give you clarity, or create any blind spots?

Abhijeet Dipke: My time at Boston University had a profound impact on how I think about communication, public discourse, and civic engagement. Coming from a political background in India, I already had practical experience, but BU gave me the academic foundation to better understand how narratives are built, how public opinion is shaped, and how communication can be used to mobilize people around a cause. The classes challenged me to think critically, question assumptions, and look at issues from multiple perspectives rather than simply through a partisan lens. Being surrounded by people from different countries, backgrounds, and political beliefs made me appreciate the importance of listening, dialogue, and the exchange of ideas even when there is disagreement.

At the same time, distance can be both an advantage and a disadvantage. Being away from India gave me a certain degree of clarity because I was able to step back from the daily political noise and look at broader patterns and concerns, particularly those affecting young people. Sometimes when you are too close to an issue, it becomes difficult to see the bigger picture.

COMtalk: A lot of students at BU’s College of Communication want their work to matter beyond a portfolio or a paycheck. What’s the most useful thing you learned — inside a classroom or outside of it — that you’d tell them to hold onto?

Abhijeet Dipke: If I am being completely honest, most of the lessons that shaped me did not come from a classroom. They came from closely observing politics, engaging with people from different backgrounds, listening to their concerns, and seeing how decisions made by those in power affect the lives of ordinary citizens.

My time at Boston University was incredibly valuable because it gave me the theoretical foundations of communication and helped me understand concepts such as audience engagement, media relations, public opinion, and strategic messaging. However, it was my experiences outside the classroom that taught me some of the most important lessons. The more I observed the real world, the more empathetic I became toward people whose struggles were very different from my own. Those experiences also made me more vocal because I realized that staying silent is often the easiest option, but not always the right one.

One thing I would tell COM students is that communication is far more powerful than many people realize. Too often, especially in the age of social media, communication gets reduced to chasing likes, views, shares, and engagement metrics. While those things have their place, they should never become the ultimate goal. When used thoughtfully and responsibly, communication has the ability to influence public opinion, shape important conversations, hold powerful institutions accountable, and bring about meaningful change in society.

The biggest lesson I learned is that communication is not simply about getting attention. It is about helping people understand an issue, encouraging them to care about it, and inspiring them to take action. If you can do that, the impact of your work will extend far beyond a portfolio, a campaign, or a paycheck. It can genuinely make a difference in people’s lives, and I think that is one of the most rewarding things a communicator can achieve.

This interview has been edited for length.