Celebrities preach to us constantly about the dangers of global warming, the destruction of the rain forests, the depletion of the ozone layer, the extinction of cute and cuddly animals (not the ugly ones, of course), the waste of natural resources, and on and on and on and on and on. But their feeble attempts at being socially conscious only betray their utter hypocrisy. These pampered, high-maintenance celebrity saviors are the most wasteful people on the planet.
For a tiny example of what I'm talking about, just take a look at some of the formal backstage demands Sheryl Crow makes when she performs. Her food and beverage requirements could feed a nation of starving people for at least a month. This is the same woman who thinks we can all help save the environment by limiting ourselves to only one square of toilet paper per sitting. (Note to self: don't shake hands with Sheryl Crow.) She also thinks we could make a difference by doing away with paper napkins in favor of the "dining sleeve" she designed. What genius!
I don't know what it is about this celebrity mindset, but I think it borders on being mentally ill. It exhibits itself in strange behavior like musicians spending millions of dollars on a benefit concert to help the world's poor, knowing full well that it would be much more cost-effective to take that relief directly to the ones who need it.
Another symptom is in the form of idiotic statements like the one Leonardo DiCaprio made at this year's Academy Awards: "For the first time in the history of the Oscars, this show has officially gone green." Huh? You mean, they were using energy-saving fluorescent bulbs in those spotlights? Were all the bathrooms supplied with either cloth towels or blow dryers to conserve paper? None of the catering or construction crews used diesel-guzzling trucks in preparation for the event, and each limousine was replaced with a Toyota Prius? And none of the celebrities arrived in Hollywood via a private jet?
Please. If we were really serious about saving the planet, we would ban celebrities.
That is most certainly so if we judge celebrities' ecological impact according to the Ecological Footprint Quiz!
ReplyDeleteI just took it, and was informed by my score that "If everyone lived like you, we would need 4.5 planets."
But, being that the quiz judges you by things like how many miles you travel, how many hours you fly per year, and how many square feet is your house......well, a lot of celebrities need a whole planet of their own (and surely some come from one).
Funny, now when I try to test my hyperlink above, it won't go to the original link "www.myfootprint.org". Instead it immediately forwards to a site called "CaliforniaFreebies.com"
ReplyDelete:)