The negative PR against Sajal is becoming so obvious that it's almost diabolical. The volume of people talking negatively about her, compared to those defending or appreciating her, is quite telling. It raises serious questions about coordinated narratives, bots and organised hostility. Is sy pata chalta hai ke Sajal ke against negative PR ka level kitna zyada hai.
Let me explain why I find this particularly interesting.
1. Sajal's professional reputation is built on years of consistent work, not manufactured hype.
15 years in the industry, countless performances and very few publicly reported issues with people she's worked with. Rarely do you hear someone from her sets speaking negatively about her character or work ethic.
In fact, the opposite is often the case.
- Naimal has openly said that she will continue talking about how nice Sajal was to her.
- She has reportedly encouraged people to message her if they face any issues and said she would help.
- Qudsia mentioned that actors don't usually like being approached with questions, but Sajal is someone she can message whenever she needs guidance, and Sajal responds despite being busy.
- Anayah has also shared positive experiences.
These aren't just compliments about someone's acting. They speak about her interpersonal behaviour, generosity and professionalism beyond the requirements of a drama set.
Of course, she's human. There might have been disagreements or occasional issues on a set. That's normal. Har set py personalities different hoti hain. But there's a difference between occasionally having a disagreement and consistently having a problematic attitude.
What matters is whether someone learns, reflects and grows. Sajal doesn't have to be perfect. She has evolved, learned from experiences and moved forward. Dheet nahi bani rahi, stubbornly holding on to the same mindset.
And that's precisely why a sustained negative narrative against her seems so disproportionate.
2. Why would someone benefit from negative PR against Sajal?
Let's look at the industry dynamics.
- Established competition: When someone has spent years building credibility and is considered one of the finest performers, their position naturally becomes a benchmark. Newcomers benefit from being compared with an established name, particularly when the comparison is designed to diminish the established actor rather than objectively assess performances.
- Shortcut to visibility: Instead of building an independent identity through consistent performances, attaching yourself to an already established actor can generate instant attention. Sometimes even negative comparisons create publicity.
- Shifting attention: When discussions about another actor's performance, conduct or professional decisions become uncomfortable, redirecting the conversation towards Sajal can change the narrative. Instead of addressing the original criticism, the discussion becomes about her fans, her alleged PR or her personal life.
- Creating a rivalry narrative: You don't necessarily need to outperform someone if you can create a perception that you're competing with them. Comparisons, fan wars, selective edits and negative commentary can manufacture a rivalry that benefits the newcomer through visibility.
And this is where I have a problem. Khud mehnat karo, apni identity banao. Kisi aur ko degrade karke apni position establish karne ki kya zaroorat hai?
3. Zanjeerain and the treatment of Rabiya's character.
During Zanjeerain, I noticed how Danyal and Sahar's PR appeared particularly active. Positive PR is absolutely fine. Everyone is entitled to promote their work.
But there's a difference between promoting your own character and participating in a narrative that diminishes someone else's.
Sajal's character, Rabiya, wasn't discussed or highlighted to the same extent as Bano and Sarbuland, despite the performance and the potential for meaningful character discussion.
If Sajal had been actively pushing her own PR in the same way, surely her character would have received considerably more attention too.
And if you understand social media algorithms, engagement patterns and promotional strategies, you can understand why this distinction matters.
Rabiya's character also seemed to receive disproportionately harsh character criticism compared with other characters. It was interesting to see how certain narratives developed around the characters and how selectively people chose to interpret their actions.
4. The personal attacks and selective outrage are another issue.
Someone making an edit against you doesn't give you a licence to start taking revenge on every actress who has ever worked with that person. If someone has genuinely defamed you, address the actual issue through appropriate channels.
But low emotional intelligence is when someone says something wrong, gets called out and instead of addressing the criticism, responds with, 'Koi bhi kuch bole, I'll drag your favourite.'
Aise hi jese fight do logon ke beech ho aur ghar mein bethi maa behen ko gali dena shuru kar dein.
And this bitterness eventually starts reflecting in everything.
There's also this expectation among some newcomers that everyone should treat them like babies, constantly accommodate them and never offer criticism.
Yumna once talked about how they used to get scolded by senior actors and directors, and how even a little criticism could make newcomers sulk. Experience comes with learning to accept feedback. Three or four hit projects and two or three years in the industry don't automatically make someone entitled to another person's position or recognition.
Success takes time. Build your own crown instead of trying to take someone else's.
5. The history of comparisons and jealousy in the industry.
We've seen similar dynamics before.
Take Chhami, for example. Mawra was the lead, but audiences connected strongly with Sajal's character. Even audience polls reflected that difference in popularity.
Mawra had reportedly made comments about people creating sisterly videos after watching her and her sister, which came across as quite self-congratulatory. And when the audience's affection for another character became apparent, the reactions surrounding that popularity became interesting.
There were also uncomfortable comments about Sajal's appearance, including height-shaming involving her mother.
Why should another actress's popularity become such a personal issue? Being the lead doesn't guarantee that audiences will connect most with your character. That's the beauty of storytelling.
And this is exactly why I dislike manufactured rivalries. A character becoming popular doesn't mean another actress has lost something.
6. The difference between Sajal's actual standing and the narratives around her.
Sajal isn't someone whose talent is established merely through fan pages, Twitter trends or social media likes.
She's been recognised by people who understand the craft: directors, writers, producers and audiences who appreciate acting beyond superficial popularity.
She's considered one of the finest performers not just in Pakistan but among the strongest actresses in South Asia. Her performances have repeatedly demonstrated an exceptional understanding of characters, emotional depth and versatility.
People who have worked with her have also spoken about her professionalism and good ikhlaq.
Think about it: if she wanted to manufacture an image of herself, she could invest much more aggressively in positive PR. Drama views can be artificially inflated, Twitter trends can be pushed, likes can be boosted and promotional campaigns can be organised.
There's nothing inherently wrong with promoting your own work. Everyone does it.
But Sajal doesn't appear to be aggressively pursuing all these manufactured indicators of popularity. Her career has largely been built around performances and the recognition that follows them.
And that's an important distinction.
7. The nepotism and industry lobby factor.
Let's also acknowledge that talent isn't the only factor determining opportunities in this industry. Connections, privilege, established networks and lobbying matter.
Nepotism is a privilege. Having access to the right people, projects and networks can make a significant difference.
Sajal has spent years delivering performances, yet even she hasn't always received the scripts or opportunities one would expect for someone of her calibre.
Even I've criticised her script choices in the past. But realistically, she can only choose from what is offered to her. Sometimes she makes the best possible choice from the available material.
So when someone has spent a decade establishing their credibility, why should newcomers expect instant recognition without putting in comparable work?
8. The double standards on social media.
I've noticed that Sajal's appreciation often receives immediate downvotes on Reddit. The moment someone praises her, the conversation can quickly turn towards accusations about her PR or fans.
But the same people seem to spend considerable time discussing her, making negative assumptions and keeping conversations about her alive.
There are active groups and discussions on Reddit and Twitter that repeatedly revolve around her.
And then the same people complain about Sajal fans being obsessed?
I've personally seen more Sajal fans appreciating Durefishan than the other way around. Obviously, I cannot speak for every individual fan, but the contrast in the interactions I've observed is worth discussing.
If we're going to talk about toxic fandoms and negative PR, we should apply the same standards to everyone.
9. Constructive criticism is not the same as a smear campaign.
I have absolutely no issue with constructive criticism. Actors should be open to it. If a performance isn't good, discuss it. If a script is weak, criticise the writing. If someone makes a mistake, hold them accountable.
But why does the hostility continue even after a drama has ended? Why does the conversation move from characters and performances to an actor's personal life, relationships and character?
Someone who rarely discusses her personal life shouldn't have her private life turned into everyone's favourite discussion topic.
And why is every achievement, compliment or appreciation met with suspicion?
This is where criticism starts looking less like genuine audience feedback and more like an attempt to undermine someone's image.
10. My actual point: Sajal doesn't need to participate in this game.
Sajal has already built a place for herself through years of work. She doesn't need shipping narratives, manufactured rivalries or constant comparisons with newcomers to validate her position.
She needs good scripts, challenging female-centric characters, strong directors and writers, and the freedom to continue growing as an artist.
Her work should remain the centre of the conversation.
As she herself has said: Mehnat kar, hasad na kar.
Allah ne sab ka rizq banaya hai. Koi kisi ki shine nahi cheen sakta. If you're talented, work on your craft. If you want recognition, earn it through consistency.
Positive PR,branding and promoting your work are all legitimate parts of an actor's career. But negative PR, character assassination and attempts to shift blame onto someone else are entirely different things.
And finally, I don't claim that every negative comment is a bot or that I can conclusively identify who's behind every campaign. But the patterns, timing, repeated narratives and selective hostility deserve scrutiny.
Data, consistency and context matter. Sirf allegations laga dene se reality change nahi hoti. Eyes need to see, and people need to analyse rather than blindly follow whichever narrative is trending.
Sajal doesn't need to be compared with newcomers. Let them build their own identities. She's already spent 15 years building hers.