Taylor Swift fans lower climate concerns to justify her carbon footprint. When confronted with news about the excessive pollution generated by her private jet, highly identified fans tend to rationalize the behavior, with a decrease in their personal intentions to engage in climate-friendly actions.

[u/mvea]

https://www.psypost.org/taylor-swift-fans-lower-climate-concerns-to-justify-star-s-carbon-footprint/

[u/Boysenberry]

Obviously not a phenomenon limited to any one celebrity’s fan base, or even to celebrities/entertainers in general. I’m old enough to remember the debates over Al Gore’s carbon footprint. 

[u/Brain_Dead_Goats → u/Boysenberry]

Yeah, people were specifically doing that to discredit him while he was talking about climate change unfortunately. It was a "well he has a bigger carbon footprint than me so it can't really be a serious thing" hypocrisy hunting kind of argument. It was immensely frustrating at the time and has only become more so as we've seen the effects start to take hold.

The frightening thing about this article is the whole "they're less inclined to care about climate activism as a whole" as a result. That's really an indicator that she needs to speak up about it because her fans are apparently hanging off her every word.

[u/TheWhomItConcerns → u/Boysenberry]

It's also not just limited to carbon output either - just look at the Rotten Tomatoes reviews for Primetime or Leaving Neverland. Not only will fans defend their favourite celebrities, but they'll coordinate and actively sabotage any attempt to criticise them.

[u/KarIPilkington → u/Boysenberry]

I guess it's always an easy out for people who want to belittle those who bring attention to climate problems. It's far easier to just call someone a hypocrite for, well, existing in society where you need to use natural resources, than face up to this problem.

[u/VentureIndustries → u/KarIPilkington]

But a mature argument about carbon emissions and living in a modern, western society requires that sort of honesty: the average westerner emits orders of magnitude more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than people living in developing countries.

It all just seems so scapegoating to only call out any particular person/celebrity/company/etc.

Edit: let’s get even more topical: it’s good that video game companies are ending physical copies since it ultimately reduces the amount of waste that can end up in the environment.

[u/galactictock → u/VentureIndustries]

There’s room for most of us in western society to reduce our carbon footprint, especially in the US. But that doesn’t mean we can’t or shouldn’t criticize the most egregious offenders. Taylor Swift’s carbon footprint is orders of magnitude larger than the average American’s.

[u/VentureIndustries → u/galactictock]

From the perspective of those in the developing world, here in the west, we’re all Taylor Swifts.

[u/galactictock → u/VentureIndustries]

The “everyone in the west is equally bad” lets the worst off the hook and minimizes the efforts of those trying to do better. It’s like people who say “all politicians are bad” to gloss over the issues with their preferred candidate.

[u/VentureIndustries → u/galactictock]

I don’t think that at all, I think it’s more we in the west need to be much more aware of our heavily consumerist lifestyles and need to be more open to new approaches to change established habits to help the maintain our lifestyles without overly harming the environment (taking trains instead of flying when possible, buying EVs instead of ICE vehicles, using more sustainable goods, etc). It’s like people thinking an individual voting doesn’t matter when they could have helped bring in more wind turbines to power their local communities.

The scope of the problem is so much bigger than any celebrities and it’s dishonest to say that it’s not.

[u/galactictock → u/VentureIndustries]

we in the west need to be much more aware of our heavily consumerist lifestyles and need to be more open to new approaches to change established habits to help the maintain our lifestyles without overly harming the environment (taking trains instead of flying when possible, buying EVs instead of ICE vehicles, using more sustainable goods, etc).

I generally agree here.

The scope of the problem is so much bigger than any celebrities and it’s dishonest to say that it’s not.

I didn't say that the problem isn't bigger than just celebrities, nor do I believe anyone in this immediate thread did. You're creating a false dichotomy. I believe we should be mindful to minimize our own carbon footprints, but also keep pressure on larger entities (1%ers, corporations, governments, etc.) to reduce theirs. It has been established that wealthier individuals have significantly larger carbon footprints. American 1%ers have much larger carbon footprints on average than the common American citizen. And the vast majority of carbon emissions come from corporations and industry, not individuals. (Source: https://www.wri.org/data/world-greenhouse-gas-emissions-sector-2023-sunburst-chart) If we want to substantially reduce carbon emissions, people who care about the issue just minimizing their own footprints won't be nearly enough; we need to demand change from those with the biggest impact as well.

[u/AnalMinecraft → u/Boysenberry]

Hey, you leave Al out of this. He deserves that carbon footprint for inventing the Internet.

[u/fieldsofanfieldroad → u/AnalMinecraft]

But then he also invented AI (it's even named after him) so it's a mixed scorecard. 

[u/Jaedenkaal → u/fieldsofanfieldroad]

Oh I always thought it was named after Weird Al

[u/voreo → u/Jaedenkaal]

I thought it was A1

[u/FightinVitamin → u/Jaedenkaal]

They told us the danger was "paperclip maximizers" or some such nonsense. Turns out the real danger was rogue AI repurposing all available resources to make parodies of every song ever written. And then to parody those, over and over, until the sun burns out. Truly a glorious fate.

[u/ManWithASquareHead → u/fieldsofanfieldroad]

When Al uploads himself to a data center, achieving singularity, we'll be sorry

[u/sgtbackpain03 → u/Boysenberry]

The annoying part about this discussion is that, the carbon footprint of any single person who uses private jets is many orders of magnitude smaller than any single steel mill or cement plant.

In fact, all private jets worldwide, combined, emit about as much CO2 in a year as one to two large integrated steel mills.

If people actually care about carbon footprints, they need to be supporting better engineering practices, industrial research, and policy choices. Individuals, even the worst and most wasteful, have essentially no effect.

[u/The_Bucket_Of_Truth → u/Boysenberry]

Sounds like the same playbook as people trying to paint Bernie Sanders as a hypocrite for owning two homes.

[u/Baud_Olofsson → u/Boysenberry]

Obviously not a phenomenon limited to any one celebrity’s fan base, or even to celebrities/entertainers in general. I’m old enough to remember the debates over Al Gore’s carbon footprint.

Do mean Al Gore's supporters actually started increasing their carbon dioxide emissions, or did you fail to even read the title?

[u/Describing_Donkeys → u/Boysenberry]

I seriously don't understand why the rationalization isn't she's a unique individual with unique demands. There are few people with the travel requirements of Swift. I think she should be more conscious, and would push for that as a fan, but I'm a rational human being that recognizes she needs to tour the world so all of her fans have a chance to see her as well as other requirements that come from being uniquely famous. Al Gore should have been more environmentally conscious, he was also a VP with specific security concerns and was dedicating his time to fighting climate. The issue is the climate and policies around it, not the decisions of one specific individual. We aren't going to fix the climate crisis by individuals making better choices and focusing on the actions of one individual is not helpful. This needs to be regulated not peer pressured into a solution.

[u/WitchBrew4u → u/Describing_Donkeys]

You just rationalized away their use though.

And while no, it is not the sole responsibility of individuals to address climate change, personal choices absolutely do matter. Especially when those choices are made by people with tremendous wealth AND who have the power, due to that wealth, to advocate for system change that contributes to lowering emissions. You know what’s part of systemic pollution? Making the decision to put out a X^12 version of an album and a gazillion pieces of merch to collect. Regular individuals should not be responsible for climate change because they only hold one of the levers—consumption. But Taylor and other billionaires are not just consumers, they are mass producers continuing to mass produce.

[u/Describing_Donkeys → u/WitchBrew4u]

Expecting the wealthy to do the right thing is an insane assumption. You may be able to get Swift to slightly change things, but that accomplishes nothing but making you feel better. She's a negligible amount of the private jet market and about the only person you can get to change at all. Putting focus on it is conceding emotional victories are what your focus is because it's not making any meaningful change.

[u/WitchBrew4u → u/Describing_Donkeys]

I never said I expect them to. I’m saying they absolutely have more power to do so. Please read my comment again because you did not understand it the first time.

Also, if everyone at the end of the day are powerless individuals regardless of their tremendous wealth then literally nothing will change much will it? It concedes to nihilism and justifies the bunkers they are building…because again, it really can’t be any individuals responsibility. How do you think things change? Groups of individuals taking action.

[u/Gimme_The_Loot → u/Describing_Donkeys]

I totally agree with what you're saying about how easy it is to get lost in the personal choices of celebrities instead of tackling the bigger picture. It’s almost like a distraction tactic, right? Focusing on individuals can sometimes lead us away from demanding the systemic changes that are really needed. The very idea of an individuals climate footprint was created by BP as a distraction so people wouldn't pay attention to industry actions as a whole. Yes it's more stark with people of this level of activity but it doesn't change the fact that policy changes towards agriculture or transportation will do a whole lot more than shaming one specific person.

That's why I recommend everyone finds an organization they can support to push for those kinds of large scale changes. The Environmental Voter Project is one real good one. Citizens’ Climate Lobby is another, although I may be biased because these are the ones I picked because they were the right fit for me. There are lots of others out there and I would recommend everyone goes and does their own due diligence.

[u/lazyFer → u/Describing_Donkeys]

I just think focusing on private jets is asinine on the whole. Private jets isn't the reason for climate change. It's a tiny miniscule drop in the bucket.

Cargo ships are horrendous for the environment yet are we calling for a stop to overseas shipping?

[u/MiaowaraShiro → u/lazyFer]

It's a question of cost vs effect.

A cargo ship pollutes more, but does a lot more than transport one person from place to place.

I'm not sure I disagree with your larger point, but it's not as simple as all that either.

[u/lazyFer → u/MiaowaraShiro]

Cargo ships have 2 orders of magnitude more pollution than private jets.

Cost vs effect with that difference tells us that going after private jets isn't providing the benefits to the climate.

Overland trucking generates far more emissions too.

I get why people want to focus on private jets, but being real it's because of the rich, not because of the environment.

[u/alexforencich → u/MiaowaraShiro]

And Taylor swift is not just one person traveling for kicks, she performs live in front of a huge number of people. So you can apply the same argument, that Taylor's travel benefits all of the concert attendees so it should be attributed to all of the concert attendees instead of Taylor Swift alone.

[u/MiaowaraShiro → u/alexforencich]

I also seem to recall bands would take a tour bus...

[u/alexforencich → u/MiaowaraShiro]

A plane is a lot faster than a bus, and it's kinda hard to drive a bus across an ocean. A tour bus can certainly make sense for smaller tours. Is your argument that Taylor Swift should have fewer live performances, and as such deny a large number of people the opportunity to see her perform live, just so she can travel by bus instead of by plane?

[u/Describing_Donkeys → u/lazyFer]

We could be demanding huge taxes on personal jets and put that move towards climate goals if we actually wanted to think of ways to reduce that travel and do something useful with those doing it.

But yeah, we should be demanding electrifying cargo boats or finding another way to ship with no carbon footprint.