Call Mulder: The Case of Mysterious Drone Sightings
Welcome to Top Conversations in Tech, where we isolate the hottest trends, falling stars and shifting market dynamics to help technology marketers maximize their relevance. This month’s data reflects news and blog citations in December 2024 versus November 2024 and December 2023. We currently monitor 270+ topics, with data and insights going back to March 2019.
The end of the year holiday season brings, overall, less coverage. Seven out of the top ten conversations decreased from November, including our top three: #1 Cryptocurrencies (604K, down 6%), #2 Bitcoin (580K, down 10%), and #3 Artificial Intelligence (462K, down 18%). Those that increased? #4 Smartphone, #5 Drones (surprised, anyone?) and #7 Encryption. This month we’re taking a deep dive look at #5 Drones.
#5 Drone coverage stayed consistent over the course of 2024. A variety of outlets touched on the topic but the top outlet, meaning the outlet that published the most on drones, was Associated Press. Most coverage stemmed from one-off mentions in bigger military stories, but two distinct spikes happened: one in April and one in December:
- April: The conflict between Iran and Israel led Iran to launch drones directed at Israel. What was described by top news outlets (e.g., NPR) as unprecedented led to conversations around how the US may assist with de-escalation.
- December: News covered an alleged increase in drone sightings across the United States that led to some concern over foreign governments spying on Americans or chemical/nuclear threats.
The spikes in coverage indicate that outlets fawn over big news events, like international conflict or an alleged scourge of drones, rather than cover drones with the purpose of directly touting the implications of the technology. Instead, the news coverage becomes outwardly influenced by paranoia and fear, leading to commentary from F.B.I., Defense Department, the Department of Homeland Security, President-elect Trump, the National Security Council, drone experts (e.g., Ryan Wallace, associate professor of aeronautical engineering at Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University) and people dedicated to debunking conspiracy theories, like Mick West.
In terms of what drives news coverage for drones: big events, typically tied to conflicts (i.e., militia usage) or unique sightings. What stands out, however, is the need for better communication.
Case Study: Uptick of Alleged Drone Sightings in the US
#1 – People Look for Patterns when Potential Threats are Detected
Patterns offer a way to make sense of the world around us. It is human nature. As a reminder, these unusual drone sightings started in November of 2024—New Jersey, specifically, experienced an uptick of drone sightings for around a month. What turned unusual sightings into a pattern were the additional drone sightings across the east coast of the United States, ranging from New York to Connecticut, Pennsylvania, and Ohio to name a few.
#2 – Expert Commentary Only Goes So Far…
As previously noted, this month-long event drew commentary from a wide range of sources, but news outlets primarily propagated commentary from government departments and the, at the time, president-elect. However, the DHS, FBI, FAA & DoD released a joint statement, a month after the first sightings in New Jersey, about the sightings. The statement noted that the sightings were nothing “anomalous” with no alleged threats to national security or public safety.
Additional commentary, including that not in the official statement, attempted to educate people on the amount of typical drone activity the US faces, including drones flying over what might be considered critical infrastructure. However, some “expert commentary” went as far as to suggest that the sightings and public response were “slight overreactions” much to the avail of the local law enforcement.
#3 – When People Consider the Communication Insufficient
The response to the supposed surge in drone activity left people feeling frustrated. A lot of the communication aired on the side of “you should feel safe, but we understand that you have concerns.” Based on those speaking with media, the fears weren’t assuaged because the why behind the drone sightings wasn’t addressed. People commented on the size of the drones, questioned why they were there, and were met with a version of “no cause for concern, though we understand your feelings.”
Local law enforcement commented on the communication coming from the federal government, too: “‘I was actually more frustrated when they said our eyesight was going or it was a figment of our imagination. That was an insult to many people,’ Sherif Mastronardy told the BBC.”
This quote sums up the general feelings: “That makes me feel safer because the fact that nobody was saying anything was scaring me more,” Christina Campenello, of New Jersey says. “I’m looking forward to finding out more answers.”
#4 – People Will Fill in the Gaps
Trump commentary on the drone issue accounted for roughly 30% of drone coverage in December. The most pointed commentary came from a conference Trump held at Mar-a-Lago, “the government knows what is happening. Look, our military knows where they took off from…They know where it came from and where it went, and for some reason they don’t want to comment.” In this case, Trump filled in the gaps that seemingly confirmed what people feared: that the federal government wasn’t communicating in an honest manner. Now, the intentions behind the Trump commentary can be debated until 2026, but the series of events turn us back to a core aspect of humanity: a desire to understand and make sense of the world.
Top Takeaways
#1 – The drone conversation is driven by big events. These mentions, or topical citations, typically don’t stand alone but are woven into bigger stories that fall into a political context.
#2 – “Big events” draw commentary from experts. Looking at the drone sighting event in depth, we could see that primarily government agents and law enforcement spoke about regarding the issue. Some drone experts, primarily those at universities, were able to provide expertise around drones themselves but the bigger narrative, “what secrets could the government be keeping,” took center stage. No tech companies stood out as providing any POVs on what was happening. Given the political (over-)tones, this isn’t surprising. Does that mean that companies can’t speak out? No. There might be space, depending on the framing, to help educate people on drones—their size, usage, and how to treat/interact with them.
#3 – A lack of communication leads to gaps and feeds uncertainty. The statement and commentary from the feds coupled with the commentary from local law enforcement pointed to an issue: disjointed communication. Local law enforcement has a closer relationship with citizens than does the federal government, so unsatisfied local law enforcement could fuel unrest among citizens.
#4 – Information gaps will be filled by someone. The then president-elect Trump inserted himself in the drone conversation, alleging that the government knows more than it is telling its citizens. For an audience with a lot of uncertainty, this could reaffirm and validate feelings.
#5 – Know your audience, know your audience, know your audience. It is not sustainable to assume you are speaking to your audience in a vacuum. Now, we all must assume that when we speak, others will, too. What the federal government said might be the most accurate, honest and transparent statement, but it didn’t answer the primary narrative concerns.
Lastly, to zoom out and answer the question of “what does this mean for the broader drone conversation” – it adds a layer of reputational concern. How does this event, intertwined with political overtones, implicate drone technology? But what do you think? Do we need Mulder and Scully?
Check out previous installments of Top Conversations in Tech here.
