• PatFusty@lemm.ee
    133·
    9 months ago

    Wait a second this picture is photoshopped 😡

    It looked real for a second

  • Pleb@feddit.de
    97·
    9 months ago

    Oh no!!! 😱😱😱
    Take that down! It leads to harassment and stalking of her!!!11 😥😥😥

    • EdibleFriend@lemmy.world
      73·
      9 months ago

      She’s the target of memes because just recently she tried to shut down the guy who tracks her jet. Streisand effect. Nobody was talking shit about her jets(well a lot) until she screamed to the world leave my jet alone.

      • Beldarofremulak@lemmy.world
        18·
        9 months ago

        Didn’t she get put under the super microscope after she told her followers to register to vote? That got the Fox news tribe to do their double standard selective outrage thing and now all of a sudden republicans care about fossil fuels and emissions.

        • TheFriar@lemm.ee
          20·
          9 months ago

          She did that years ago. Like, five years ago. These memes are a response to her suing the kid

            • fishos@lemmy.worldEnglish
              11·
              9 months ago

              I love how it’s “the evil Republicans” doing all of this. Plenty of us are Democrats who think Taylor is incredibly hypocritical for not practicing exactly what she preaches. And least you forget, she’s a literal billionaire. That “1%” we point to as the worst contributors. And oh look, there she is, being just like the people she vilifies.

              She’s a hypocrite plain and simple and the facade is starting to finally break. Her entire persona is manufactured by teams of publicists. She’s no different that the other billionaires, but she has you convinced she’s your best buddy.

              • Flumpkin@slrpnk.net
                1·
                9 months ago

                think Taylor is incredibly hypocritical for not practicing exactly what she preaches

                And I think this is genocidal propaganda and misogyny drafted by FOX news. Yeah that’s grossly exaggerated and over the top, but hear me out:

                First of all she’s not very political. At least not as far as I can tell, her opinions are rather mild basic human decency level stuff, but I don’t know much about her. This to your charge that she “preaches”.

                Second, society being what it is you CAN’T practice what you believe, because our economy is build a certain way. She can’t do her job without a private jet, so even though there is some valid criticism there you’d also have to put the emissions her business use creates on the concert goers or consumers. It goes on their CO2 budget no hers. She even bought CO2 offsets which are BS of course.

                Third, she’s being singled out, possibly because she’s supposed to be this white madonna. It’s apparently true that she uses her jet for private and “frivolous” purposes. But with all the jet setting going on, it’s at least suspicious that people want her to be the symbol of all evil. Some very clever sociopaths crafted this strategy because she’s the perfect symbol for it.

                Lastly, even if all the criticism of her was justified it’s a distraction from the monumental and systemic issues preventing any meaningful action on climate change: Land reform, veganism, election reform, wealth redistribution, redesigning how we live and work, patents preventing adoption of improvements, planned vs free economy. Those are topics that nobody wants you to talk about. So instead it’s advantageous to blame her.

                Afaik this all started with FOX news bashing her jet and the joke was “why is CO2 bad FOX news?”. But it WORKED!!! They have successfully disseminated a conspiracy theory that 20% of voters believe now and memes like this are trending.

                Sorry about the rant, I really don’t mean to accuse anyone seriously of this, but this is the PR mechanisms I see working behind this stuff.

              • Beldarofremulak@lemmy.world
                1·
                9 months ago

                … There was a whole thread here that got deleted where someone else was saying the exact same thing you are saying and I defended myself. If you re-read my comment, don’t add tone, don’t insinuate, de-prime yourself, it’s just me asking a question and adding context to the timeline. I don’t remember her ever being this big a part of the political conversation until after the “register to vote” thing. None of the old men at my work ever talked about her politically until after that. Yes these memes are about the current situation. My comment isn’t denying that. All it’s doing is asking a question about when she was on the political radar and pointing out when and how I noticed. Now I’m somehow a swifty defending her jet use because I recalled events? What in the world is going on in your life that causes you types to react like this and take it so personally? Is it because I used the R word and didn’t immediately follow it up with a D? Go outside!

              • Beldarofremulak@lemmy.world
                2·
                9 months ago

                So the people I work with who never talked about her until after the whole register to vote thing actually started talking about her because of this recent lawsuit? Is my timeline off? All I was adding to the conversation is that was the START of the scrutiny, not the cause of these memes.

                • EdibleFriend@lemmy.world
                  4·
                  9 months ago

                  You’re talking about a whole bunch of different shit. Right here, right now, we’re talking about the memes about her stupid jet. You’re trying to change the subject to something else.

                  Republicans are having a temper tantrum because because of her political stances. Are you trying to say this is a republican meme? On a Republican website?

      • Blackmist@feddit.ukEnglish
        11·
        9 months ago

        Isn’t that just because she had two jets?

        I seem to remember a similar list a while back, and they got rented out a lot. I can’t think of many other reasons to have two of the fucking things.

        I’d be surprised if a lot of private jet owners don’t rent them out tbh. They’re not cheap, and even if you’re a super duper important rich cunt, how often do you really need to use them?

        • fishos@lemmy.worldEnglish
          3·
          9 months ago

          Then… why doesn’t she rent in the first place? Why is she so important she needs TWO? That’s the EXACT hypocrisy being pointed out.

          • Blackmist@feddit.ukEnglish
            2·
            9 months ago

            Cos presumably you make more money if you own them and rent them out yourself…

            Although maybe that’s not doing so well since she sold one the other week.

            The joys of having fuck you money, I guess.

            • fishos@lemmy.worldEnglish
              5·
              9 months ago

              Oh, so it’s about making money and not the helping the environment. So EXACTLY the hypocrisy people are pointing out.

        • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
          2·
          9 months ago

          You can rent private jets. It’s not too crazy expensive if you use the full capacity. It’s about 50-100% more than flying on a Delta level flight.

    • ryathal@sh.itjust.works
      34·
      9 months ago

      Elon bought a company to shut his problem down, but he still gets memed too. More recent events get more memes.

        • I_Fart_Glitter@lemmy.world
          24·
          9 months ago

          https://www.sfchronicle.com/tech/article/elon-musk-twitter-battle-bird-18663113.php

          The Tesla CEO’s hyperfocus on acquiring the San Francisco-based social media giant intensified after Parag Agrawal, its former CEO, rejected Musk’s request to block an account run by 21-year-old Jack Sweeney that used publicly available data to track Musk’s private jet.

          “The billionaire started buying Twitter shares shortly after Agrawal denied his request,” according to an excerpt from “Battle for the Bird” by Bloomberg reporter Kurt Wagner. The book suggests that Musk’s motivation to ban the jet-tracking account was the primary driver behind the $44 billion purchase in November 2022, which left many industry analysts perplexed.

          • Cavemanfreak@lemm.ee
            6·
            9 months ago

            Nah. He just tried some good ol fashion market manipulation by saying he would by Twitter in public. And since he had a non-significant amount of shares he was basically forced into the deal or being caught red handed doing illegal stuff openly. Plain old greed + stupidity.

          • Mac@mander.xyz
            1·
            9 months ago

            No, he definitely bought it because he was forced to after trying to fuck witt it by making claims.

    • Jax@sh.itjust.works
      39·
      9 months ago

      Are we suggesting that Taylor Swift is an individual here?

      Because taking a private jet everywhere isn’t exactly the same as the fossil fuel industry pinning climate change on the everyday person’s emissions.

      • AlteredEgo@lemmy.ml
        12·
        9 months ago

        If you distribute the emissions on all the consumers, the concert goers then it’s probably negligible. And their fault. So we should attack people who go to music concerts. But really we should attack celebrity culture. Much less funny meme though

        • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
          20·
          9 months ago

          I can’t believe I didn’t realize this but a few days ago someone here mentioned she could take a tour bus.

          Duh!

          She could reduce intra-country emissions by a lot but still use her jet to fly abroad.

          • dumpsterlid@lemmy.worldEnglish
            9·
            9 months ago

            Yeah flying around the country performing concerts is absurdly wasteful, but we are in an apocalypse movie, this subplot about a musician flying around maybe being selfish or not just doesn’t really register amid the thunderous sounds of corporations and the rich demolishing whole swaths of our planet.

            Billionaires flying around on jets is disgusting because they don’t actually do anything they just tell other people what to do, fire people and collect the money. At least taylor swift or any other musician flying around actually PHYSICALLY gets up on stage and plays the gig in the cities they fly too.

      • deaf_fish@lemm.ee
        2·
        9 months ago

        I mean, by definition she is an individual. A really bad individual when it comes to see CO2 emissions.

        If you’re interested in improving things. Then all the Taylor Swift posting is actually working against you. You’re basically spreading the vibe that Taylor Swift alone is the problem or that people who travel a lot in private jets are the problem. Which is not a useful truth in that there are way bigger polluters.

        What would be great is if we got a bunch of funny memes about industry producing a huge amount of fossil fuels. That would be more productive.

  • Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works
    16·
    9 months ago

    I’m just wondering, okay coming from Japan to the Superbowl she was in a tearing hurry, so not the best example, but normally, how many people are usually in that jet with her? (Separate question maybe: When she’s touring, how do the roadies and equipment get from city to city?) She’s got quite a large entourage, especially when you add in her friends and family and cats and someone to help herd the cats. I wouldn’t want the price or availability of my vacation tickets affected by them all piling on my flight. And touring is her job. She’s going out to entertain the masses, not herself (she seems to be having a good time but still). Would it be better if she stayed put and they all traveled to see her? A few do follow her around but most are pleased to see her show up in their local area. I’m just not convinced it’s the worst waste of resources. Now, the Pope…!

    • balderdash@lemmy.zip
      52·
      9 months ago

      Let me get this right: your argument is that she needs the private jets because she has a large entourage and likes to take her cats with her?

      • Maalus@lemmy.world
        13·
        9 months ago

        The argument is “if the plane is full of people it’s different than a CEO going for a joyride alone or with his wife only”.

        • killeronthecorner@lemmy.worldEnglish
          34·
          9 months ago

          Full of people… Who only need to be there because of her.

          This is like arguing it’s more efficient to put wheels on your house and drive it to work every day

        • balderdash@lemmy.zip
          23·
          9 months ago

          That doesn’t seem like a relevant difference. She chose to bring the entourage and the cats. If the CEO chooses to bring some friends along are we cool with his carbon footprint all of a sudden?

          • Maalus@lemmy.world
            3·
            9 months ago

            She performs with the entourage. She needs the roadies, the dancers etc. If a CEO brought their workers for a job, then yeah, I’m cool with his “carbon footprint”.

    • Evia@lemmy.world
      13·
      9 months ago

      I think it depends on need vs want. Does she need her cats, friends and most of the crew? No, she just wants them. Most large venues are able to povide staging crew, for instance. I can see a ‘need’ for a stylist or lighting director for example, since a local placeholder just wouldn’t be able to re-create the exact style or look that they want.

      But that’s not enough people to warrant a private jet. I think it’d be more justifiable for the plane to be fitted with regular passenger seating and for those seats to be sold to the public as commercial travel

      • Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works
        3·
        9 months ago

        I would think you’d want crew who had trained on the show, who knew exactly where and when the lighting/pyrotechnics/scenery/instruments/costume/etc. changes need to happen, in order to minimize tech rehearsals. And if you’re Taylor Swift you can afford that, rather than muddle through with whoever is available at the venues in each town of each country. It might even be more cost effective, by way of the Vimes Boots Theory of Economics. And it would pay off in a clean, safe show every time.

        As for friends, in a touring lifestyle how would you have any if they can’t come with you, at least sometimes?

        Now that suggestion about selling tickets for the rest of the plane is intriguing. She could make a bundle selling them to fans, OR, she could give those spaces to people who need and deserve them. Cancer kids or whatever. Although with the crazy hate out there for her, it would be a security risk…

    • Sprokes@jlai.lu
      3·
      9 months ago

      They use private jet to not mix with so I am sure she doesn’t fly with a dozen of people.

      • Mouselemming@sh.itjust.works
        2·
        9 months ago

        There’s other reasons for flying private.

        If you didn’t have to arrive 2 hours early to get through Security, nor limit your liquids, nor take off your shoes, nor take out your cat so its carrier can be scanned, nor wait to board the plane, nor wonder if your baggage made it onto your plane, and you could be sure ahead of time that you’d like the food, and the whole airplane would get quiet if you wanted to sleep, and no crying babies unless you bring one… What would you choose?

        And there’s definitely people who want to kill her.

        But that doesn’t include her mom or her friends or her stage crew or bodyguards or publicity people.