I’ve spent the better part of last week watching the comedy acts on Indian TV. What I am focusing on are stand-up acts that offer political, social and news satire and spoofs. There are five such shows across networks, and the only word to describe them is insipid.

In terms of purely stand-up acts, two new shows hit the airwaves in March 2012 – the returning Movers and Shakers (M&S) on Sony which is hosted by Shekhar Suman, and the brand new Late Night Show on Colors hosted by Sumeet Raghvan.

I can faintly recollect watching M&S years ago. During its initial run from 1997 to 2001, it was, in many ways, a path-breaking effort. There were a few laughs to be had, and television was finally opening up to taking a pot-shot at public figures other than Bollywood celebrities. The imitations of Rashtriya Janata Dal chief Lalu Prasad and then Prime Minister, Atal Bihari Vajpayee were refreshing. And it was scandalous to actually have wisecracks – previously only part of private conversations – actually be heard on air.

That was the late Nineties and a lot of water has flown under the bridge since then. For instance, the advent of multiple 24/7 news channels has made politics and politicians more accessible. The explosion of social media has afforded dissent, irreverence and conflicting perspectives a stronger voice. Yet it seems that the producers or writers at the show have failed to realise that.

To begin with, the lengthy disclaimer at the beginning of these programmes is a complete cop out, particularly when it is followed by a chest-thumping statement by the anchor about how they are not afraid to offend. That itself is the single most hilarious bit of the show. It’s a measure of how petrified mainstream TV is of our loony fringe, waiting to be outraged at the drop of a hat. However, if you sit through that, what you will find is that Suman is still stuck in the Nineties. A one-trick pony of sorts who just can’t seem to move beyond Lalu Prasad and Vajpayee, although the country seems to have. The stand-up act is stale, and the social and political commentary is uninspiring. It lacks the sense of incredulity and outrage that a comedian needs to evoke. And it doesn’t even appear that Suman himself finds the act funny. He would do well to take a cue from Lalu Prasad on that. Plus, Rubber Band! You’ve got to be kidding me. Whoever came up with that genius pun should have been fired decades ago. I can’t believe they’ve still maintained that. If you wish to, then the only reason to tune in is the celebrity guest – invariably a member of the Bollywood fraternity.

Meanwhile, Raghvan on Colors tends to offer a far lengthier act. There is no celebrity guest here. That sort of clout will take time, effort and more money, I guess. The absence of a guest is a double-edged sword. At one level, it allows the anchor far more time and space to tackle news and events. However, it also means that the act needs to be extremely sharp and well-conceived. Otherwise, the audiences will vanish rather quickly. And that’s what happened with me after a few episodes. To be honest, Raghvan isn’t all that bad. However, the material that he works with is far too limited. His take on celebrities and movie stars is much more entertaining than Suman’s. But when it comes to politics, he falls as flat and hard as his counterpart.

I don’t need to watch a stand-up act where clichés are repeated. The UPA has multiple power centres. Rahul Gandhi is mama’s boy. LK Advani still wants to be PM. Vajpayee enjoys poetry. Lalu Prasad has a unique style of communication. Mamata Banerjee is a tough cookie to work with. Manmohan Singh cites coalition compulsions for all of the government’s limitations.

These are bits that are so common that we hear them every day during prime-time news discussions. I demand much more from the folks who claim to be comics and satirists. If you want to offer satire, then stop dancing around popular clichés. Moreover, anybody can tell a joke. These folks should be focusing on highlighting hypocrisies, challenging popular culture and perceptions, questioning and even mocking the trending and unsavory bits of us at individual and societal levels. That’s where a good comedian finds humour. You don’t need to construct an old-fashioned joke for that. What you need is better observation and perspective.

And while they are at it, I seriously hope that they put an end to the needless musical intervention to stress that what was said was indeed funny. It’s terrible when anything pertaining to sex gets mentioned with an effeminate biting of the lip or shying away from the lens followed by a strange squeaky tune. Offend and outrage, please!

Apart from these, there is Comedy Circus on Sony TV. Despite numerous attempts at watching it at length, I’ve failed. It takes real courage to sit through Archana Puran Singh’s laughter spasms.

In comparison, the shows on our news networks are far superior. Cyrus Broacha’s The Week that Wasn’t on CNN-IBN is a blend of slapstick with satire. Set up as a news parody, it does reasonably well, in large part owing to the host. It’s really difficult to not find Cyrus funny, even if he’s just sitting there silently. But besides that, there are bits, particularly the various avatars with Kunal Vijaykar, which remorselessly take a dig at public figures, spoof the apathy of the well-off and highlight socio-cultural fault-lines. Does it offend? Does it question policies? No, not really. Does it entertain? Well, in a way, yes.

Finally, and perhaps the longest running satire on Indian TV, are the puppets on NDTV – The Great Indian Tamasha and Gustakhi Maaf. Considering that these are written and produced by a news network, it isn’t surprising that they have the most intriguing take on current affairs. The puppets take no prisoners and actually provide us with perspectives that can at times leave one wondering why news anchors can’t do the same. They take positions on issues and are bold enough to target people and structures. However, just like most of the political analysis in India, they don’t really focus on policies, limiting themselves to personalities and politics of power.

Now the obvious caveat that I can place here is that humour is relative. However, that’s a weak excuse. At the end of the day, comedians and satirists have a critical role to play within a society. Owing to the nature of their craft, they can challenge prevailing norms, attitudes and structures and have greater popular appeal than academicians and analysts. And they don’t need to ignore entertainment in order to do that. However, what we find on TV is that the comedian’s role is somewhat like it is in Bollywood movies. The comedian is there merely for buffoonery – to offer momentary relief from the real story. So by and large, what we get is loud-mouthed, mindless slapstick and clowning around. It’s all rather puerile for the most part. There’s very little play with subtlety, irony, surrealism, black or blue humour. And it doesn’t seem like it’s changing anytime time soon.