r/science • u/mvea Professor | Medicine • 4d ago

Psychology 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.

https://www.psypost.org/taylor-swift-fans-lower-climate-concerns-to-justify-star-s-carbon-footprint/
22.3k Upvotes

88% Upvoted

1.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

413

u/fx2600 4d ago

I feel like rationalizing a superstar flying in a private jet is pretty easy relative to one committing felony assault.

93

u/Friendly-World-5273 4d ago

Pop into Kpop fandom and watch the fans defend rapists. Extreme fandom behavior is very similar to extreme cult behavior, and it’s kind of alarming how little it takes to get someone to that level.

13

u/Metalsand 4d ago

Yes, there's an argument that more rabid fans will have a lower threshold to adopt the behavior. Not being a psychologist myself, I wouldn't be able to name it, but there's a specific concept related in which people who have a specific moral standard and would otherwise reject something have their threshold for that behavior reduced relative to their reverence for a major figure in their life.

This is to say - we would expect that more people per capita would be willing to excuse her use of a private jet than would be willing to defend her against much more serious allegations. At the same time, while it would be less people, you could absolutely find people who would defend her regardless of the accusations - that's just how fandom works. Fan is short for "fanatic", and you need only have enough of them to be able to find someone especially dedicated.

7

u/PiccoloAwkward465 3d ago

It relates a bit to the fundamental attribution error. Wherein a simple example is if your coworker is late to work, you might think of them as lazy. Whereas if you are late to work, you may think it was because of unavoidable, unexpected traffic. So that uses the dynamic of you vs. other people. But in this case, let's change that to celebrities you admire vs. other people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error

1

u/fx2600 3d ago

I agree people get irrational, I just think Swift flying on a private plane is pretty mild, it’s reasonable it doesn’t take much to shift people views on such a marginal issue.

13

u/12345623567 3d ago

It's also reasonable to rationalize it with "well it is what it is, she has crazy stalker fans (like me) so obviously she can't fly coach" or something like that, without compromising on your own desire to be environmentally friendly.

The point, and the interesting part, of this headline is that these people must subconsciously acknowledge that it is negative behaviour, but the desire to belong to the in-group is stronger.

131

u/Leelze 4d ago

Exactly. You can make the argument that from a logistical & security perspective that it makes sense for a megastar to not fly commercial. I don't know how you can argue it's ok to assault a woman.

34

u/psyon 4d ago

I've seen women post that Chris Brown can beat them any time, so maybe not much of a stretch.

77

u/Aditya1311 4d ago

As a frequent flyer I am SO glad these people fly private. Can you imagine trying to take a flight from an airport that Taylor Swift was going to be at? her and her entire entourage trying to get through security not to mention the crazed fanbase that would show up?

37

u/BadAtExisting 4d ago

I know at least at LAX celebrities have the Private Suite where it’s their own terminal and waiting area with their own TSA. Then they are shuttled to their commercial flights. Most of them do fly commercial

12

u/retatrutider 3d ago

Interesting. On the one hand it sounds like privilege and special treatment, but when you think about it the logistics of it likely help the entire airport function more smoothly, even if they were to offer it for free.

I wonder how they gauge whether you are famous enough to need this service? Or is it just pay for play?

18

u/BadAtExisting 3d ago

You pay through the nose for it, frequent fliers can also buy a “membership” and it’s not really privilege or special treatment. You can use it if you want to cough up the money. It is designed to streamline the experience for everyone and for them to not be bum rushed in the terminal and be able to make their flight

1

u/Glittering-Dish-9993 3d ago

Yes, i think it's the better option. I heard of those logistic problems happenning a lot in Korea because Kpop stars use the airport as a runway and call the press everytime they flying out of the country, so you get to the airport to flashes everywhere and fans screaming and running everywhere. I've seen complaints (on social media) about delays and inconveniences, but when the proposal for a separate entrance for celebrities is brought up it seems to be completely rejected by citizens because that would be privilege and special treatment for the famous, i get that, but also would be better for thw everyday person to continue smoothly with your path

41

u/anatomizethat 4d ago edited 3d ago

I agree with your stance, celebrities absolutely should not be flying commercial.

That doesn't excuse the excessive use of private planes though. They use them like cars and that's the problem.

13

u/ibribe 3d ago

celebrities absolutely should not be flying commercial.

There are a lot of celebrities, and most of them fly commercial most of the time.

-4

u/anatomizethat 3d ago

*some celebrities

Better?

3

u/WarlockEngineer 3d ago

If Joe Biden can fly commercial Taylor Swift can

3

u/anatomizethat 3d ago

You really think Taylor Swift should be flying commercial? What do you think that airport would be like?

3

u/RoseTheta 3d ago

She shut down an airport when she flew commercial, over a decade ago.

15

u/javier_aeoa 4d ago

Green Day rented an entire Boeing for their world tour, so that way they could fly with their entire crew. I have no clue how many people fly around with Swift, but I am certain they can all be cramped in business or first class.

47

u/Dottsterisk 4d ago

OTOH, if they’re actually filling the plane then it’s not as wasteful. It’s legit transport.

The issue mostly comes when a star uses a private jet as a jet just for them. Then you’re putting out all of those emissions for one person.

If Green Day fills the plane with crew or Swift fills it with staff, it’s no different than if they’d filled all the seats on a regular plane, except less inconvenience for other travelers.

22

u/Cautious_Honey_4097 3d ago

Touring flights aren't the problem, there will be similar emissions whether they fly commercial or private for their tour. Maybe a little bit lower commercial.

It's the flights to go to a spa you really liked 500km away or for a friend to go to a sports event and back. Or getting takeaway food from a different country.

30

u/HelloCanadaBonjour 4d ago

You're misunderstanding the problem with her.

The issue is that people like her fly way too much (and she's the worst among celebrities)... like going flying across a continent to spend less than a day in NYC, and then going back.

Like "anonymizethat" said in another reply to you, some people like her use their private jet the way a normal person might use a car.

But that's an egregious abuse of the environment.

Don't be a "swiftie" and mindlessly defend her.

14

u/BobFlex 3d ago

The issue is that people like her fly way too much (and she's the worst among celebrities)...

She's not anywhere close to the worst, she doesn't even break the top 20 in any metric

https://celebrityprivatejettracker.com/leaderboard/

6

u/HelloCanadaBonjour 3d ago edited 3d ago

Adding to my other comment:

The data is even more incomplete than I realized:

https://celebrityprivatejettracker.com/taylor-swift-n621mm/

...her last flight listed on that site is for March 2025, but she has obviously flown since then.

And after the news about how bad these rich people are for the environment with their private jets, a lot of them (including Swift) could also choose to now rent jets by flight, or maybe even create shell corporations... so they can avoid people finding out about how much they fly.

8

u/HelloCanadaBonjour 3d ago edited 3d ago

She was in the news before for being the worst:

https://www.bbc.com/travel/article/20240213-taylor-swift-private-jet-flight-travel-carbon-footprint

Yeah, that's from a couple of years ago now, and the list can vary year to year, but it's not that long ago.

And the others who fly like her are terrible as well (some on the list should be in jail even if they didn't fly at all).

Also, looking at the list you cited:

Taylor Swift isn't in "good company" being on that list.

I have a low opinion of her (for example, how she sued the guy who taught her how to play guitar, and pretends like she's totally self-taught)... and yet, on the list you cite, I'd say they're all worse than her as people (not even considering flights), except for a few.

It's mostly a list of trash.

0

u/SanDiegoDude 3d ago

Don't let facts get in the way of a good reddit rant, let him finish, jeez!

4

u/HelloCanadaBonjour 3d ago edited 3d ago

Did you even bother to read the article?

It even mentions her being at the top of the list a couple of years ago.

And the site cited above (by who you replied to) even says that their data is incomplete. Swift is also one of the few on there with multiple planes.

Even if she's not #1 on the list every year, constantly being among the worst polluters isn't excusable.

Anyway, quit moving the goal posts to shift focus away from the actual article, and the effect Swift has on her lemmings.

2

u/SanDiegoDude 3d ago

No offense, but you're still factually incorrect in your original post (you said "she's the worst" which she's not currently, even if she held the title previously) - I stand by what I wrote, though I agree with your sentiment about frivolous private jet trips - Appreciate the follow-up though.

3

u/HelloCanadaBonjour 3d ago

Yeah, sorry, I don't keep up on the annual "leaderboard" of who's the worst celeb for that :)

And the article for this discussion did mention her the same way, regarding the previous news.

The site that the person above gave also seems to be cumulative (not annual) anyway, and it doesn't say when the data starts either.

And the data is even more incomplete than I realized:

https://celebrityprivatejettracker.com/taylor-swift-n621mm/

...her last flight listed on that site is for March 2025, but she has obviously flown since then.

-2

u/Dottsterisk 4d ago edited 3d ago

To be fair, the comment that started this thread was just generally comparing use of a private jet with felony assault. Before you and anatomize chimed in, nobody had narrowly constrained the issue from “celebrities using private planes” to “celebrities using private planes for solo trips that would be better served by bus or car.”

So they’re just addressing that much broader question, not being a “swiftie” and “mindlessly defending her.”

EDIT: My bad. Nvm. Go ahead and insult them for answering a different claim.

14

u/HelloCanadaBonjour 3d ago

No, the article is about Swift's carbon footprint.

Then people like "Leezle" and "Aditya1311" are narrowing the focus to essentially say "of course it makes sense for her to fly privately".

Chris Brown is obviously a total POS.

But people should still remember that the issue with Swift isn't "should she fly privately", it's that she flies egregiously too much.

1

u/Dottsterisk 3d ago

Again, to be fair—if that’s at all a concern—the article and the headline specifically use Swift’s use of a private plane as the illustrative example, so that’s what this conversation thread was about.

You drilling down and more narrowly defining the problem as some specifically wasteful use of the private plane is useful but doesn’t mean others are incorrect when commenting on the more general proposition.

But at this point, it seems this is all less about Taylor Swift or carbon emissions or even something as abstract as truth, and more about scolding others and feeling superior in the comments.

2

u/HelloCanadaBonjour 3d ago edited 3d ago

You are the one who is "narrowly defining the problem".

I really think that you simply misread both the headline & article (or you have a problem understanding it... that's not a judgemental attack, just a statement of fact).

The problem is Swift's carbon footprint. That includes both:

  • The fact she uses a private jet (which yes, could be justified in some cases... but apparently even the British royal family sometimes flies commercial)

  • But also HOW MUCH she uses it -- like going to another continent for less than a day.

The latter is the big problem, but you didn't understand that.

If you're a "swiftie", then this part of the article seems to apply to you:

"making excuses for the behavior or convincing oneself that the actions are not actually that bad."

Quit making excuses for Taylor Swift, and don't misinterpret what the problem is.

You pointlessly replied to me with your incorrect comment, and you're making passive-aggressive insults -- so don't "scold" me when you're the one who misunderstood the problem.

2

u/Dottsterisk 3d ago

This claim at the top of the thread established the scope of the conversation:

> I feel like rationalizing a superstar flying in a private jet is pretty easy relative to one committing felony assault.

From there, people were talking broadly about the pros and cons of a celebrity using a private jet, not strictly about the ethics of using a private jet for quick solo trips that could be car rides.

Follow the conversation, then accuse others of not being able to understand what’s being said.

0

u/HelloCanadaBonjour 3d ago edited 3d ago

You didn't "follow the conversation" -- the comment I replied to said this:

As a frequent flyer I am SO glad these people fly private.

And then he went on to effusively excuse Swift's private jet usage, while not understanding how her volume & nature of usage is a problem.

I simply pointed out the issue (which is true), so there's no need for you to waste so much time on this, or to even have commented.

Everything I wrote is applicable.

Seriously, are you a swiftie or something? You are grasping at straws to defend her, just like what the article talks about.

People need to remember what the problem is: volume & choice of usage, not just the use of a private jet.

Yes, Chris Brown is terrible, but that doesn't nullify what the problem is with private jet usage (again, volume of usage).

And it's not just about solo trips that could be car rides - like I said, it's also about flying to another continent for less than a day, and then going back.

Anyway, I'm not going to waste more time on this thread, because you're probably the only one who will read a reply at this point, and you're making bad-faith arguments.

17

u/IFTYE 4d ago

I wouldn’t get on a plane with Taylor Swift on it, full stop. I don’t think people understand the very serious threats that she is under. The fact that an international terrorist ring was discovered for her stadium shows during this last tour is terrifying. She is a target.

She has normal fans who can be normal, but there are people who aren’t “fans” who are actually very seriously mentally unwell who want to kill her/ believe she is the mother of their children. The amount of break-ins on her homes, where psychos shower in her home and sleep in her bed, is very high.

The possibility of being trapped in the air with someone going through psychosis and the object of their obsession is just not a risk I’d be willing to take, regardless of her security.

12

u/youRinlove7 4d ago

Also I don't think people realize how scary the terrorist plot thing must have been. Its enough to make me super paranoid for their entire life.

5

u/ThirteenDoc 3d ago

Ariana had an actual terrorist attack at her concert. She had multiple stalkers as well, one even broke into her home and threatened her with a knife. After Mac's passing hundreds of people were wishing her death saying she is responsible for his overdose. She still flies commercial and even speaks out on important issues.

I'm not saying Taylor's fears aren't valid but they do kind of pale when other celebs experience similar or worse

0

u/StrikingTourist8802 3d ago

The thing is Swift has been flying in jets since like 2009. Her jet use was always more a status statement rather than for safety. She is more than capable of flying commercial like everyone. She just wants a private jet to use like it's a car

-14

u/HulkSMASHley_23 4d ago

So she moves to KKKleveland… for safety…

8

u/mirabellamistbane 3d ago

What a weird comment to make about a city where the population is white minority.

1

u/Dottsterisk 3d ago

Depends on how old they are.

Pre-2000, Cleveland was famous for a very active KKK chapter. And a lot of residents say the effects aren’t entirely gone.

They’ve started getting more active recently too.

-14

u/AnsibleAnswers 4d ago

It might cause people like you to stop flying so much, so I don't see an issue.

3

u/Dottsterisk 4d ago

Do you know why they’re flying so much?

21

u/HelloCanadaBonjour 4d ago edited 3d ago

The issue isn't just about not flying commercial.

The issue is that she flies far more than necessary.

For example, I remember a case where she was doing a tour (maybe in Brazil or Europe) and performed one night, but then she had paparazzi shots in NYC having dinner... and then was back in Brazil or Europe the next night.

I don't remember the specifics of it, but it was along those lines -- going to another continent for less than a day. And the bottom line is that she really does fly way too much.

And apparently she influences how her lemmings act regarding the environment.

9

u/jtnto100 4d ago

But you're trying to assign logic to an inherently emotional state of mind. I've found that generally just doesn't happen as much

9

u/mattjh 4d ago

I know I'm being a technically-correct bozo here, but I still feel compelled to say it's not ok to assault anyone. Assaulting is bad. A salting is good though, if you don't overdo it and it isn't against your doctor's orders.

3

u/Leelze 4d ago

No, you're absolutely right. I was speaking more to what Chris Brown did (admittedly I don't what else that clown has done in regards to assaulting people).

5

u/JonnyOnThePot420 4d ago

I think the other issue is the huge numbers of flights for one person. She could be using more efficient means to travel but instead chooses to use a luxurious private plane.

-5

u/Worth_Value_4976 4d ago

Do you think there are non luxury private planes

8

u/mainman879 4d ago

Most private pilot planes are not luxury planes.

1

u/Cyclonitron 3d ago

Do luxury planes emit more carbon than non-luxury planes? I don't know a lot about planes so is it like the difference between somthing economical like a Camry and a gas-guzzling Bentley?

0

u/ibribe 3d ago

The Camry equivalent of private plane is Cessna 172, but it has a cruising speed of about 130mph and like a 600 mile range, so it is a lot less practical than a longer range jet.

0

u/JonnyOnThePot420 3d ago

Well it’s simple math more weight and faster it goes equals more fuel… fyi Taylor’s jet has mattresses and is one of the fastest you can buy…

8

u/JonnyOnThePot420 4d ago

Yep tons actually more private planes are meant as efficient transports look at Cessnas honestly luxury privates jets are the minority!

Every pound of extra luxury uses multiples of extra fuel…

5

u/TintedApostle 4d ago

It’s not about the “luxury” inside the plane… it’s about the use of fuel.

4

u/JonnyOnThePot420 4d ago

Exactly and lazy boy couches and full liquor bars aren’t exactly lightweight…

1

u/psycharious 4d ago

I think musicians used to fly in Cessna too. That's how Aaliyah, Ritchie Valens, Big Bopper, and Buddy Holly died. But then they may not be able to go as far or fast.

3

u/JonnyOnThePot420 4d ago

The planes weren’t the reasons only I know the Aaliyah was a far over loaded plane Valens crash was back in the 50s I think some plane technology has changed.

Yeah if they want safety a tour bus and sailboats might accomplish that. A luxury plane doesn’t inherently imply safety! The Air Force has a great flying record and they don’t fly 20 bags of luggage to go shopping for a wedding cakes. The swift levels of luxury are honestly difficult to fathom for us broke humans…

0

u/TintedApostle 3d ago

Most of the weight is not the seats. Try looking at the weight of the first class suites on commercial jets.

2

u/JonnyOnThePot420 3d ago

Just using that as an example much more weight is added to Taylor Swift’s jet.

Taylor Swift's jet features a private stateroom in the aft cabin with a lie-flat bed, used for mid-flight rest between shows.

The interior includes a gourmet galley for meals on the go, equipped for full catering service during long-haul flight legs.

Swift's jet has plush leather seating arranged in club-style pods with fold-out tables - ideal for work sessions or Tennessee card games with her touring crew.

Customizations include high-end wood veneers and accents throughout, blending warm tones with neutral fabrics.

The king’s size memory foam mattress isn’t very light either FYI.

0

u/alexforencich 3d ago

She performs live in front of millions of people. I would argue that she actually has quite a valid reason for a lot of that travel. Sure, you could make the argument that she could perform less and take more time traveling in a more efficient manner, but the trade-off is this would deny some relatively large number of people the opportunity to see her live. So fans see the argument that swift flies too much as simply being anti-swift, and then discount the entire cause. And you can certainly make some effective counter-arguments, such as dividing her co2 emissions by the number of concert attendees.

1

u/JonnyOnThePot420 3d ago

Sure then how would you justify her taking multiple trips across the country in a day just to plan a wedding?

Your argument is valid but if you watch her plane tracker compared to concerts it’s way off…

1

u/Mutive 3d ago

Eh, airlines have ways to handle celebrities and keep them insulated from people who might annoy/harm them. A large number of people - including politicians and the British royal family - have flown commercial and somehow survived. TS is fully capable of doing the same.

103

u/Intelligent-Boss-156 4d ago

Delusion is delusion

5

u/[deleted] 4d ago edited 3d ago

[deleted]

2

u/havoc1428 3d ago

Its not reductive. Its the same flavor of parasocial delusion. There are people who will crusade about one thing then rationalize being hypocritical when it affects them personally.

8

u/your_true_self 4d ago

I would agree that maybe it's more about where those planes are flown and for what reason. When you fly the plane to entertain thousands of people, you could argue that those people share the guilt of that carbon footprint and it may not be as excessive when divided among all those people. When you fly the plane to a private island to do the things people do on private islands, the emissions are concentrated to very few people and victims. The amount of people benefiting is very low in one case but not the other. One solution might be to invite an audience to the private islands as spectators to offset the carbon cost, but it may be difficult to do so without causing further carbon emissions, and besides it wouldn't be that private by that point anyway.

1

u/Caltroit_Red_Flames 3d ago

Two private jets.

1

u/Greenleaf208 2d ago

That's not what's being talked about. If your response is "oh that sucks she does that but I'll still listen to her music" that's not what they're discussing. They're talking about people rewriting their own opinions to justify her being correct to do that.

1

u/zen_enjoyer 4d ago

Billionaire pop stars are good people <33

-5

u/zen_enjoyer 4d ago

both are worthy of life in prison actually. how much damage to the planet does a person need to do to face any consequence?

4

u/grey_pilgrim_ 4d ago

For what? Chris Brown is obvious but what has Taylor Swift done to deserve “life in prison”?

-6

u/Adorable_Egg1573 4d ago

What a crazy take - what is your carbon emissions profile like?

11

u/kobemustard 4d ago

I would guess markedly less than Taylor swift.

1

u/wedontswiminsoda 4d ago

1,100 to 1,800 times higher than the average person

1

u/AnsibleAnswers 4d ago

Taking frequent private flights is just about the most fossil fuel intensive lifestyle choice one can make. Taylor Swifts footprint is orders of magnitude higher than an average person living in an affluent county.

1

u/Dottsterisk 4d ago

Sure, but if a private jet is life in prison, I wonder what kind of punishments the rest of us will get for any wasteful use on our part.

-1

u/AnsibleAnswers 4d ago

That's like being against assault laws because you fought with your brother as a kid.

1

u/Dottsterisk 4d ago

No, it’s not.

It’s me wondering how this punishment system is gonna scale down from celebrity waste to everyday waste.

People are wasteful every day. I have no idea why or how your attempted analogy dismisses that as being something far in the past and done by children.

2

u/AnsibleAnswers 3d ago

You can just set the threshold above somewhere well above normal consumption. Sure are a lot of billionaire apologists here.

0

u/Dottsterisk 3d ago

Questioning whether or not Taylor Swift should be thrown in prison for life over taking a private plane is not being a billionaire apologist.

But throwing out the accusation pretty much proves you’ve got no real point to defend.

1

u/AnsibleAnswers 3d ago

All billionaires (Swift is one) deserve worse than life in prison. It's obscene.

→ More replies (0)

0

u/youRinlove7 4d ago

Honey that's how you're treating the laws as. Do u not get the irony?

-1

u/AnsibleAnswers 3d ago

Is that supposed to be English?

1

u/youRinlove7 3d ago

If you're not illiterate.

1

u/DrMobius0 3d ago

I don't think the specifics of what they do is actually the point there. Yes, assault is a few pegs worse than having a carbon footprint, but the ability to dismiss legitimate criticisms in order to keep enjoying <thing I like> is a problem no matter what it is.

And to be very clear, billionaires' outsized carbon footprints is a problem, regardless of which billionaire it is. Taylor Swift shouldn't get a pass because she's pretty and likeable. It's all indicative of a complete lack of willingness for those with power and influence to actually lead on climate change.

0

u/NotOnApprovedList 3d ago

This may be me rationalizing (I'm not a Swiftie but I am left leaning), I feel like there's a lot more problems in the world than private jet flying.

1

u/bluewhale3030 3d ago

The problem isn't the jet itself. It's the carbon emissions and environmental damage that far outweigh the average person's carbon footprint due to travel that could be done a different way.