Mediacheck

A Modest Proposal: Labels on Celebrities

Let's stamp the stars with their giant eco-footprints for all to see!

By Vanessa Richmond, 15 Jul 2009, TheTyee.ca

Beyonce

Beyonce and her private jet: 60-planet lifestyle.

Text size:

Rate this:

Login/Register

Related

What if celebrity news carried its own version of a nutrition label? But instead of calories, or health risks, how about a label that gets at celebrities' impact on the planet?

Imagine if each time a tabloid or movie or TV show fed our celebrity addiction by running the image of Angelina, Bono or Gisele Bundschen, they also were required to put the celeb's eco-footprint in the corner of that image? If the tabs really wanted to knock themselves out, they could also run a kind of eco-ingredient list -- the number of hours the celeb spends in the air, the square feet of housing she owns, number of children he has, and so on.

It's an idea with real timeliness, if I do say so myself. A few weeks ago, uber-feminist Naomi Wolf praised Angelina Jolie's independence, symbolized by her ability to fly her own plane, without even mentioning that if every woman did that, we'd need a million planets worth of resources to support the human population.

Flying high

Wolf is far from alone. This week, the top story in several tabs was that Jolie has resumed "one of her favourite hobbies...flying lessons!" without making any comment about the relative impact on the planet of flying to, say, knitting or karate.

People Magazine ran a piece about how pregnant supermodel Gisele Bundschen is "constantly traveling" (what a good earth mother). John Travolta owns his own specially outfitted 747 jet.

And the Daily Mail ran a piece about how Victoria and David Beckham were in the Seychelles one day, then Heathrow, then LA the next. How smoggy their designer footprint must be!

But these stories, and most others, tell us nothing of the impact of celebs' enviable lifestyles.

Glam carbon gluttons

Last week, Carbon Footprint calculated the impact of U2's world tour. Ironically, U2 is outspoken about their commitment to the environment, but carbon output of their tour this year is far bigger even than Madonna's high-maintenance carbon-heavy tour. U2's carbon emissions will equal that of 90,000 people flying from Dublin to London, and are equivalent of the waste created by 6,500 average British or Irish people in an entire year (equal to leaving a standard 100 watt light bulb on for 159,000 years). "To offset this year's carbon emissions, U2 would need to plant 20,118 trees."

This story hit media outlets around the world within hours, demonstrating that not just me but a lot of people actually are interested in such information. (I'm guessing we belong to the same tribe of label readers at the grocery store.)

But it's not enough to calculate footprints for the odd tour or movie. What the public is most often consuming is celebrity lifestyle information. And we need good information about what that actually costs.

How to read an eco-footprint

People follow celebrities because "reality is scary and the surreal is not," says Dr. William Rees, the UBC professor who invented the concept of the ecological footprint. "We have made wealth and glitter and this false world of celebrity into the ideal, and people glom onto it." But, he adds, "in a sense, doing an eco-footprint of these folks might help ground us back into reality."

He said it's easy to calculate an eco-footprint: it's simply a person's consumption on an annual basis. And 85 per cent of it is made up of fuel, food, housing, and space heating.

Rees says that for the average individual, by far the biggest component is private transportation using fossil fuels: cars and plans. "Let's face it, most celebrities have half a dozen of those and travel by private aircraft."

The next item is food, because for most people, food travels long distances and therefore takes fuel, and it also consumes pesticides and so on. "Celebrities tend to have very high-end diets."

The next major category is water and space heating, and "the bigger your house and car, the larger your consumption of those." Of course, many celebrities not only have one large house, but many of them.

Rees said that there are only two hectares on the planet to support each person, but the average North American uses nine hectares, which means most North Americans need three to four times as much productive ecosystem as is available on the planet to support their needs. "The really inconvenient truth is that the current global development path is an impossibility serum."

What planets do they live on?

I plugged in the consumption numbers for an imaginary celebrity into this footprint calculator and this one, too. I assumed that the person had a private jet, flew more than 400 hours a year, had at least two large houses, and owned more than one car. Those consumption amounts exceeded the maximum inputs on the survey -- there was no category for more than one house, or for private jet, for example. But even given that, the survey found it would take over 60 earths to support that lifestyle for everyone.

But then, celebrities aren't everyone, are they? They live on 60 or even hundreds of planets, while the rest of us inhabit one that's arguably in deep trouble. I'm not holding my breath that my modest proposal would ever be taken up by a media industry so invested in feeding our celebrity worship.Ê But I'll keep dreaming of truth in labelling. [Tyee]

Tyee contributing editor Vanessa Richmond writes the Schlock and Awe column about popular culture and the media.

21 Comments:

Login or register to post comments

  • PatrickMcEvoyHalston

    2 years ago

    Tagging the "Suspect," the Guilt-Free Way: a how to

    Rather than tag them for their immodesty, why not tag these entertainers when they fail to shine and entertain? Not so modest, but a more reasonable proposal, me thinks.

    (Carbon-footprint is a great, guilt-free way to justify lowering those we're jealous of into the muck. A Cdn invented it? Pity.)

  • G West

    2 years ago

    An even more 'modest' proposal

    Just stop buying their music, going to their movies and paying any attention to the BS the media spews about them.

    These people don't need a label, they need an 'off' button.

  • PatrickMcEvoyHalston

    2 years ago

    G West: You're not exactly

    G West: You're not exactly a modest presence here at the Tyee. The people that make Vanessa uncomfortable are not best understood as celebrities, but those who "partake" in excess (she's minimum-wage, Vanessa R; she's holding two PT-jobs, Vanessa R). You range about too much, too freely, too whimsically, even, to not be counted amongst those with arrogant disregard, with arrogant PRESUMPTION ("please sir, may I have some more?" = "Tyee, David--fix the damn best comments!"), regardless of your distaste for celebrities, "trivialities." You're very far, very far from safe, when the mob moves to end anxiety-provoking growth, which is what it is beginning to get up to.

  • Hermans Hermit

    2 years ago

    When The Stars Come To BC

    Do they pay the carbon tax to lower their carbon footprint?

  • G West

    2 years ago

    Oh I think I'm pretty modest Patrick

    But safe, never.

    The less said about celebrity culture, in my view, the better - which is why I almost never comment on 'anything' Vanessa has to say or spend any of my valuable time reckoning with the 'importance' of what they (the celebrities) either do OR say.

    But you have, as it were, understood my analysis more or less perfectly.

  • G West

    2 years ago

    And, furthermore

    Dean Swift's proposal wasn't so 'modest' after all, now was it?

  • realisticman

    2 years ago

    John Travolta

    Does not own a Boeing 747. Though he does have an old 707.

    Don't forget Vancouver COPE Councilor David Cadman. Cadman had billed Metro Vancouver taxpayers for over $100,000 in travel and expenses for a series of junkets he attended around the world. Taxpayer-funded travel to ICLEI or other events related to climate change, sustainability or world peace have taken Cadman to destinations such as Spain, Italy, Bali, New Zealand, Australia, Japan, Korea, South Africa, Ivory Coast, Germany and the Netherlands over the past three years.

    I guess we all have to go where the action is.

  • snert

    2 years ago

    Let's not and say we did.

    "Let's stamp the stars with their giant eco-footprints for all to see!"

    What a waste of time this article is. You might as well go after the David Suzukis, Bonos and Al Gores of the world as well.

  • jwstewart

    2 years ago

    Good idea...

    But lets apply it to everyone. Every year you have to file a eco return . And if your eco-footprint doesn't go down each year, your taxes go up. (Or you get to do community service for those averse to taxes.)

  • Jeffrey J.

    2 years ago

    Great Idea

    It is always refreshing to see new thinking in an old paradigm. I've seen more "thinking outside the box" in the Tyee (and from Ms. Redmond) than I have in ten mainstream news publications.

    In this instance, Ms. Redmond makes a very good point. What IS the eco-footprint of the people we are told to worship by People Magazine et al? Why are we told to worship them? The answers are fairly clear, and if we added their eco-footprint to their "profile" it would have a huge impact on people's inclination to vicariously live through a celeb. Excellent coverage!

  • newphorik

    2 years ago

    A stellar article. For all

    A stellar article. For all the time spent by the congregation that watches them I am glad Vanessa took the time to arrange all these facts (the ones in the article that is) in such a manner that I can sit down and ponder the idea of the silent majority suddenly having the benefit of labels to point to when being chastised for saying celebrity watching is harmful.

    Before I leave, there was a comment called let's not and say we did

    "What a waste of time this article is. You might as well go after the David Suzukis, Bonos and Al Gores of the world as well."

    Bono was mentioned in the article here:
    Ironically, U2 is outspoken about their commitment to the environment, but carbon output of their tour this year is far bigger even than Madonna's high-maintenance carbon-heavy tour. U2's carbon emissions will equal that of 90,000 people flying from Dublin to London, and are equivalent of the waste created by 6,500 average British or Irish people in an entire year (equal to leaving a standard 100 watt light bulb on for 159,000 years). "To offset this year's carbon emissions, U2 would need to plant 20,118 trees."

    and it further goes on to say that the reporting of those factors in the media garnered much attention from the readers. Us:)

  • G West

    2 years ago

    newphorik

    I'm not so sure...

    In fact, I think there's a valid argument to be made that any news, good, bad or indifferent, is fodder for the celebrity machine.

    On balance, I wish they'd just stay home.

    The fact that a few hundred (at most) regular Tyee readers might see this article pales in comparison with the millions of others who're slavering for the next mention of whatever their celebrity of the month is 'eating', 'wearing', 'watching' 'listening to' or 'screwing' at the moment.

    There's only ONE WAY deal with that and get people thinking about something real and that's shutting off the switch....

    In my view.

    The task of 'educating' the monster isn't worth the effort.

    When I see Bono actually taking spade in hand and beginning to create a new forest with his own efforts I'll pay attention.

    Until then, nada. The less attention they get they better.

  • Chris Bouris

    2 years ago

    Hot off the press

    Will all the columnists personal holiday travels be equally assessed?

  • Dr Alexander

    2 years ago

    Lots of sizzle in the article but not much steak

    While I am thankful for Vanessa Richmond having provided a link to John Travola's "ownership" of a 747, a close read of the actual article indicates that he does not actually own that particular aircraft of class of aircraft. As pointed out by a previous reader, John Travolta does actually own a 707.

    Unfortunately, this kind of erroneous reportage diminishes the credibility of the argument being made by Vanessa Richmond and I would implore her to do more fact-checking the next time.

    As for the comments about Al Gore being a hypocrite. If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck... it a duck. Personally, I am not going to pay too much attention to Mr. Gore, a guy who wants me to live a certain "new" lifestyle (especially when he stands to benefit financially from me doing so) whilst he is fully engaged in the "old" lifestyle.

    Lead by example, and I am more apt to listen.

  • Chris Keam

    2 years ago

    Others with big footprints

    I'd add professional sports to the list of big polluters who get a free pass on being energy hogs.

  • David Beers

    2 years ago

    Administrator

    thanks realisticman and Dr. Alexander for the correction

    As stated in the article we link to in our piece, Travolta was 'given the keys' to a brand new 747, but only temporarily. He flew it as a publicity stunt for Quantas and then turned it over to them. He's back to flying his little old 707.

    We'll fix that. And we always appreciate it when readers identify factual errors and help us get it right.

  • newphorik

    2 years ago

    you can't educate the monster

    but you can educate their followers. this issue is not just restricted to the tyee discussion, in fact it's being discussed on CBC right now. Sadly, a good portion of our population waits for the big kids to set an example and since a lot of our "big kids" are stars (albeit, usually uneducated ones) I think it is necessary to sick the eco-hounds on them. Al Gore, Bono, Beyonce, and the etc's will do what they want as they always have but I will relish in the new found focus on their less screenworthy emissions.

    Go Tyee!

    p.s. John Travolta has a private jet 707 or 747 it's still a bigger engine than most of us. Do you think he jet pools?

  • G West

    2 years ago

    newphorik

    I wish you were right, but I'm convinced it's going to take a lot more than Tyee readers and commenters to get the average citizen out of his/her struggle to survive and to to be concerned with fomenting 'real' change.

    That doesn't mean one should stop complaining, but the main way to get celebrities to notice is to stop buying tickets to their elephantine concerts.

    My view.

  • PatrickMcEvoyHalston

    2 years ago

    The 747 vs. 707 error wasn't

    The 747 vs. 707 error wasn't nothing--747 has iconic largeness, almost like no other, while anything 07 has us thinking James Bond' circumspection. I am tempted to get at Dr Alexander's insistence that this is a difference "with a difference," as they say, but instead: it is something to be able to resist the piece's drawing on/evoking our instinctive hatred of celebrity excess, to actually pay attention to every word here, every error, here. It wanted to draw the mob out, but Dr Alexander maintained professional propriety, level-headedness. So do respect to you, Dr Alexander--you'll be a doctor in my imagination, even should you forgo the formalities, and join more swimmingly this crowd of feisty fish.

  • newphorik

    2 years ago

    G West

    You are right. I just joined the conversation because these tyee readers were discussing the issue. The main way indeed, is to hold ones money from these people.

  • gadget

    2 years ago

    ... fear and jealousy intafada

    Like the idea, here.... although I think it should be extended to politicians (... who are flogging "greenhouse" initiatives, while pumpin' gas for the oil companies?)

    Petty thinkers who have issues around this concept may be sent to their rooms to consider just what a waste of space and air their feeble wanna-be existences might be considered to be, by an objective alien observer from another planet... alternatively, they could just be drowned in their own muck, as they surely and eventually will be :D

    • The discussion for this story is closed. No more comments can be added.