Over a two-day period beginning January 7, a Media Matters analysis found:

• National TV news broadcasters — ABC, CBS, and NBC — and major cable news networks — CNN, MSNBC, and Fox News — covered the Los Angeles wildfires for a total of 33 hours and 41 minutes across 495 segments.
• Only 6% of segments and weathercasts about the wildfires across TV news mentioned the role of climate change — a total of 31 mentions.
• Cable news networks aired 31 hours and 26 minutes of coverage across 436 segments or weathercasts about the Los Angeles wildfires; just 29 segments mentioned the connection between the wildfires and climate change.
• Corporate broadcast networks aired a combined 2 hours and 15 minutes across 59 segments or weathercasts about the Los Angeles wildfires; CBS was the only network to mention climate change (twice).

The series of wildfires that began January 7 have wreaked unprecedented devastation across Los Angeles County, with the 23,000-acre Palisades Fire and 14,000-acre Eaton Fire causing the most destruction. At least 24 people have died and more than 10,000 structures have been damaged or destroyed, with economic losses projected between $50-150 billion — making these potentially the costliest wildfires in U.S. history. Over 150,000 residents remain under evacuation orders, with another 166,800 under evacuation warnings.

Scientists point to a clear climate change signature in these fires — what researchers are calling “hydroclimate whiplash,” when wet winters are followed by exceptionally dry conditions. This climate pattern, with LA recording just 0.16 inches of rain since May (compared to the typical 4 inches) combined with strong Santa Ana winds reaching 99 mph, created perfect conditions for catastrophic fires.

The extensive coverage of the Los Angeles wildfires — nearly three times the total airtime given to Hawaii's catastrophic Lahaina fires during a comparable two-day period — featured deeply reported segments with evacuated residents, emergency responders, and local officials. Correspondents, many with deep roots in Southern California, provided round-the-clock coverage from evacuation zones and fire lines, while weather teams delivered detailed forecasts about the dangerous Santa Ana winds and fire conditions.

Despite their substantial total coverage, however, most networks failed to consistently connect these fires to climate change. On cable news:

• CNN aired 12 hours and 50 minutes covering the LA wildfires across 178 segments, with 13 climate mentions. 

• MSNBC aired 7 hours and 28 minutes discussing the fires across 95 segments, with 14 climate mentions.

• Fox News aired 11 hours and 8 minutes across 163 segments. Fox’s coverage mentioned climate twice, but only to deny or downplay the role it played in the wildfires.

 On national corporate broadcast networks:

• ABC aired 52 minutes across 23 segments.

• CBS aired 45 minutes across 19 segments, with 2 segments mentioning climate.

• NBC aired 37 minutes across 17 segments.

Several instances of LA fire coverage stood out for making an explicit connection to climate change. For example, CNN correspondent Stephanie Elam connected the wildfires to climate change across multiple segments, as did CNN chief climate correspondent Bill Weir. Other substantive climate coverage included a January 8 monologue from MSNBC's All In host Chris Hayes and a January 8 discussion with climate scientist Michael Mann on CNN News Central.

One of the clearest explanations of the climate-fire connection came from UCLA climate scientist and Southern California climate expert Daniel Swain, who broke down how climate change created the precise conditions driving these winter blazes during the January 8 episode of MSNBC's Chris Jansing Reports. 

What made these segments notable was their clear articulation of how climate change is intensifying fire conditions and their broader examination of systemic impacts. For instance, Swain explained how climate change created unusually warm temperatures and unprecedented levels of vegetation dryness that set the stage for the fires' rapid spread, while Mann emphasized the alarming significance of such destructive wildfires occurring mid-winter and challenged political leaders for deflecting attention from climate action. Hayes expanded the discussion to the mounting insurance crisis, pointing out how billions in fire damage claims could force insurers to raise premiums across California, threatening the basic ability to build and finance homes in at-risk areas.

Several cable news segments challenged misinformation about the fires' causes, with Los Angeles Fire Department Captain Sheila Kelliher appearing on both CNN and MSNBC to explain the actual challenges firefighters faced. As President-elect Donald Trump and Fox News hosts blamed the blazes on “bad forest management” and falsely claimed water pressure problems were due to California’s environmental policies, Kelliher detailed how unprecedented wind conditions made the fires unstoppable and explained how local water systems were simply overwhelmed by the intensity of firefighting efforts that required over 3 million gallons in 15 hours — far beyond what residential water infrastructure was designed to handle.

This pushback against misinformation has become more crucial as harmful conspiracy theories and false claims increasingly proliferate during extreme weather events. From fabricated stories about the cause of Hawaii's Lahaina fires to viral disinformation about FEMA's disaster response during Hurricane Helene, these falsehoods can discourage affected communities from seeking vital assistance while undermining public understanding of climate impacts. National TV news plays an essential role in rapidly debunking these claims with accurate, authoritative information.

With extreme weather events poised to intensify, and an incoming administration committed to rolling back even the meager climate progress made so far and dismantling environmental protections, the need for robust climate coverage has never been more critical. While networks excel at on-the-ground coverage of disasters and their immediate aftermath, they must also properly contextualize these events within the broader climate crisis. Networks should consistently explain how climate change exacerbates extreme weather, investigate the role of the fossil fuel industry and hold it accountable, ensure balanced coverage of climate impacts across communities — particularly those with fewer resources to evacuate and rebuild — and explore viable adaptation and mitigation strategies as climate impacts become more severe. This approach can help counter the spread of misinformation while ensuring accountability for both climate inaction and any legitimate management failures.

This begins with routinely integrating basic climate science into extreme weather segments, such as explaining how human-caused warming intensifies wildfires through higher temperatures, prolonged droughts, and more frequent heat waves. Without this crucial context, viewers could be uninformed about the scope of the crisis and the urgent need for climate action. The Los Angeles fires represent just the latest chapter in an escalating climate crisis that threatens every community, making the need for comprehensive climate journalism more urgent than ever.

Media Matters searched transcripts in the SnapStream video database for all original episodes of ABC’s Good Morning America and World News Tonight, CBS’ Mornings and Evening News, and NBC’s Today and Nightly News as well as all original programming on CNN, Fox News Channel, and MSNBC for any of the terms “California,” or “Malibu,” or “Palisades fire,” or “Eaton fire,” or “Hurst fire,” or “Palisades,” or “Pacific Coast Highway,” or “Altadena,” or “Pasadena,” or “Sylmar,” within close proximity to any of the terms “wildfire,” “fire,” “smoke,” or “blaze” from January 7-8, 2025.

We included segments, which we defined as instances when the Los Angeles region wildfires were the stated topic of discussion or when we found significant discussion of the wildfires. We defined significant discussion as instances when two or more speakers in a multitopic segment discussed the wildfires with one another.

We did not include passing mentions, which we defined as instances when a single speaker in a segment on another topic mentioned the wildfires without another speaker engaging with the comment, or teasers, which we defined as instances when the anchor or host promoted a segment about the wildfires scheduled to air later in the broadcast.

We then reviewed the identified segments for whether they mentioned climate change or global warming.