Disinfo 101: Politico And The Guardian Torch The Truth On California’s Wildfires

Recent reports in Politico and The Guardian make a now-familiar but false claim: California’s wildfires, particularly the devastating events around Los Angeles, are evidence of an accelerating “climate crisis.” [emphasis, links added]

The claims made in these stories are false. Data do not show wildfires are getting worse.

The stories rely on oversimplified headline-grabbing narratives that blame climate change without examining other critical variables. In addition, they continue to make the most basic mistake of conflating weather events with long-term climate change.

California’s landscapes have evolved alongside fire for millennia. Long before industrialization, periodic wildfires swept through these ecosystems, clearing out excess vegetation and promoting biodiversity.

This is not conjecture, rather it is well-documented in history. Native American tribes understood this and used controlled burns to manage the land.

The problem today is not that California has fires—it always has. The problem is that modern fire suppression policies disrupt this natural cycle.

For much of the 20th century, aggressive efforts to extinguish all fires, combined with the abandonment of Indigenous fire management techniques allowed vegetation and underbrush to accumulate to dangerous levels.

Other factors include a shift in forest management philosophy leading to a decline in logging, resulting in overgrown forests with built-up fuel, and increasing numbers of people moving to areas historically prone to wildfires.

This surplus fuel creates the conditions for catastrophic fires, and the increased population and buildings that come with it lead to greater tragedy and cost when fires occur. Climate Realism has discussed these facts on multiple occasions, here, here, here, and here, for example.

The media conveniently ignores this, preferring to frame every wildfire as an apocalyptic omen of climate change.

By failing to include this historical context, publications like The Guardian and Politico mislead their readers into believing wildfires are a “new normal” caused solely by greenhouse gas emissions.

Also, the latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) notes several factors that have been cited by media outlets as “enhancing” the fire situation that the IPCC says have not worsened as the climate has modestly changed, nor are they expected to worsen in the future.

See the table below and note the factors boxed in red:

The breathless media claims of increased drought, increased fire weather, and worse-than-normal winds such as the Santa Ana winds just don’t hold up to scientific scrutiny.

Urban sprawl into fire-prone areas has also intensified the wildfire problem. The wildland-urban interface—where human development meets natural landscapes—is now home to millions of Californians.

This expansion means more ignition sources, from power line failures to campfires to arson and more, with more structures vulnerable to fire.

For example, the Palisades Fire, referenced in recent media coverage, began in an area with a long history of human activity intersecting with high-risk landscapes.

Investigations reveal that the fire’s ignition was likely human-caused, possibly by power line failure—a detail conveniently buried in the media’s climate-centric reporting.

Cliff Mass, a respected atmospheric scientist, has written extensively on how human factors—not climate—are often the direct cause of such fires.

The media’s failure to acknowledge the role the increased population has played in the recent wildfires is deeply irresponsible.

Expanding urban development into high-risk areas, coupled with inadequate fireproofing measures, magnifies the destruction when fires occur. Yet, these factors rarely make the headlines. Why? Because they don’t fit the narrative that climate change is to blame.

The policy failure that no one talks about is poor forest management.

Poor forest and land management is another critical factor contributing to California’s wildfires that are often ignored by the mainstream coverage.

California’s forests are overgrown, with dangerously high levels of combustible material. Controlled burns and mechanical thinning are proven methods to reduce this risk, yet California has consistently fallen short of its forest management goals.

Governor Gavin Newsom has touted California’s “climate leadership,” but his administration and the U.S. Forest Service have quietly backtracked on the forest thinning, logging, and prescribed burn targets.

A report from Climate Realism details how inadequate the state’s forest management efforts have been, leaving forests as ticking time bombs.

What is most galling about media coverage of California wildfires is its selective focus and refusal to acknowledge inconvenient facts.

This policy failure is ignored by media outlets eager to blame a nebulous “climate crisis” rather than hold policymakers accountable for their neglect. How convenient.

There is no denying that naturally driven climate change may influence some environmental conditions, such as warmer temperatures or extended droughts. However, attributing wildfires solely to climate change ignores the larger picture.

Consider this: the total area burned by wildfires in the U.S. has actually decreased since the early 20th century, according to data from the National Interagency Fire Center and summarized by Climate at a Glance.

Why hasn’t this fact been front-page news? Because it contradicts the media’s preferred narrative. Wildfires in the past were often larger and more frequent than they are today.

Climate alarmists also ignore the critical role of weather variability. For instance, Michael Shellenberger, a prominent environmentalist and author, has pointed out that many of California’s recent fires were preceded by unusually high wind events, such as Diablo and Santa Ana winds. These natural phenomena, not climate change, drive the most destructive fires.

Some reporters and scientists are blaming climate change for the lack of rain in LA. It’s ridiculous. There’s no trend in annual rainfall from 1877 to 2024. We have wet years and dry years.

Climate change isn’t responsible for the LA fires. Gavin Newsom and Karen Bass are. https://t.co/JftaPPPMLV pic.twitter.com/iX4Q7TxfdH

— Michael Shellenberger (@shellenberger) January 10, 2025

What is most galling about media coverage of California wildfires is its selective focus and refusal to acknowledge inconvenient facts.

By attributing every blaze to climate change, journalists are not just misinforming the public—they are actively undermining efforts to address the real causes of these disasters and thereby putting people at risk by encouraging poor public policies.

Blaming climate change for wildfires is an easy way to avoid difficult conversations about land management, urban planning, and individual responsibility.

It allows politicians to deflect blame and activists to push sweeping policies that often have little to do with wildfire prevention. In short, it is a cop-out.

The conclusion? Media irresponsibility is the real crisis.

By refusing to discuss the true causes of wildfires, outlets like Politico and The Guardian are complicit in hindering meaningful action.

It’s time for journalists to do their jobs: report facts, ask hard questions, and hold policymakers accountable. Until they do, they will remain part of the problem, not the solution.

Top image of a prescribed (controlled) burn.

Read more at Climate Realism