The Los Angeles wildfire in California, United States, has been the subject of media attention since it began on 7th January 2025, wreaking havoc with 31 active wildfires that affected the metropolitan and surrounding regions. Various theories are going around about why the fires started, though officials have not confirmed any theories yet. Wildfires are uncommon, especially after the steady incline of global temperatures. In 2024 alone, 61,685 wildfires were reported globally, but none received the same amount of attention from the media, world leaders, or celebrities as the Californian wildfires are receiving. The reason can be narrowed down to a single fact: Los Angeles, the hometown of celebrities and Hollywood, gives an edge to the fires.

The fires acted as a reason behind Hollywood celebrities trying to educate the people and their followers on climate change, which only exposed the hypocrisy behind their words. The trend for the longest time was publicly advocating environmental causes while privately engaging in actions that contradict their professed values by either endorsing brands or using their private jets, etc. Over the years, we have witnessed celebrities using their far-reaching, massive platforms to advocate for urgent climate action, urging their followers to reduce their carbon footprint by using more public transport and eco-friendly vehicles, vote for more green policies, and rethink consumer habits. At a glance, this may seem like progress; the celebrities are using their platforms and fame for the good of the planet, using their ability to inspire change for the good and advocating for much-needed collective action, but when the orange and smoke-filled sky clouds over the larger-than-life estates of the Hollywood elite, the evident and glaring disconnect and dissociation between the practice and the preach become more and more noticeable.

The average carbon footprint per person in the world averages around 4.7 metric tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) per year. In contrast, the celebrity emits an average of 3,376.64 tons of CO2 annually. Ignoring the apparent hypocrisy, their luxurious lifestyle, their superyachts, the continued use of their private jets, and extravagant consumption contribute significantly to carbon emissions and other environmental issues. To take the usage of private jets alone, private jets emit considerably more greenhouse gases per passenger than commercial flights. Using a private plane releases nitrogen oxides, causing particulate and noise pollution, contrails, and cloud formation, wherein the aircraft’s operating altitude can trigger vapor trails and cloud formation. Celebrities like Kylie Jenner, who suffered a severe backlash in 2022 for taking a flight that lasted a mere 17 minutes, and Leonardo DiCaprio—an outspoken and active environmentalist—have been heavily criticized for travelling the globe on luxury yachts and jets. These backlashes have been resurfacing when these famous climate hypocrites had spoken about the LA wildfires, going so far as to call them  ‘Climate Criminals’. This behavior reveals a systematic problem that reflects the disparity and injustice in distributing climate responsibility. When we are living in a world that sees celebrities as role models and influencers, when we see the very people we look up to act in ways that blatantly contradict their advocacy, it sends a message that climate-conscious living is for the average, everyday person, not the elite and privileged.

The fires are not the first time the hypocrisy and the high disparities between celebrities and the ‘common people’ were put under the spotlight. Before the fires, the recent drought in California was intensified by the recent rise in climate change; some celebrities were famously flagged and came under heavy criticism for exceeding water allotments—sometimes by tens of thousands of gallons.  While average residents were urged to save and conserve water by letting their lawns go dry and brown and by shortening showers, the lush and luxurious gardens of the celebrities painted a picture and sent out a message that conservation is for the masses, not the elite.

During the wildfires, multiple reports stated that celebrities had hired private firefighting teams to safeguard their estates, a luxury unavailable to the commoner, highlighting the stark differences between the haves and the have-nots. Furthermore, when air quality plummets or evacuation orders are issued due to these fires, the wealthy have the option of second homes and private jets and a level of safety others cannot afford.

Celebrities continue to send their ‘prayers and thoughts’ and set up GoFundMe websites to raise money for the wildfires while contributing nearly 10 times more to climate change than the commoner. These are the same celebrities who have not spoken, let alone acknowledged the 7.8 magnitude earthquake that struck Tibet, killing 126 people on the very same day as the fires. These severe floods tear through the Middle East, while the other end of the country is experiencing one of the coldest winters in history, largely thanks to the La Niña effect. These are all ongoing natural disasters that have their roots in climate change. Not just to blame celebrities, but it has become a common phenomenon of

‘Bandwagon effect’ when it comes to caring for issues. We saw examples of these in the Russia- Ukraine war, the Israel- Hamas conflict, and now with the LA wildfires. When their government is scraping or reneging on policies that once provided a bare minimum for pro-climate-driven policies, these elite classes who are in power to make a change are busy trying to convince the rest of the world that they care about climate and the consequences of climate change only when they too started getting affected just like the rest of us.

It is not to say that they should not do anything. The wildfires have exposed more than just the fragility of California’s deadly landscape; they’ve illuminated the cracks in celebrity climate activism. If these high-profile advocates hope to maintain credibility and genuinely wish to influence much-needed change, they must confront the hypocrisy between their public stances and private actions. While acknowledging the absolute devastation and loss experienced by these celebrities, once again proving that no amount of money would be enough to save you from nature’s wrath, the only thing the commoner feels is that it shouldn’t take your house literally burning down for you to start caring about the planet. Their only appeal is that these celebrities would begin practicing what they preach rather than leaving it up to the commoner to face the environmental problems they accentuate in the first place.