Question: how do you think the US government post-9/11 would respond if they actually didn't know who belonged to these drones and they were less than an hour from Washington DC (given a flight speed of 200mph https://en.defence-ua.com/weapon_and_tech/325_kmh_while_ukra...)? Would they pussyfoot around for a week, then blow smoke up our asses about it or would they immediately eliminate the threat and then blow smoke up our asses about it? I think that someone somewhere knows what's happening and won't tell us but has enough authority to stand down an armed response, which to me sounds like DHS or DoD.
yeah they shot down a friggin weather balloon with a JET, but nothing to worry about with these? they definitely know what they are and they're fine with it. field testing new drone based surveillance systems?
Not even as nefarious as that I don't think. The NJ and NY port authorities have an existing agreement as of Feb 2024 to allow for experimentation and buildout of drone-based last mile delivery systems. I think this is all a case of lazy/sensationalist journalists realizing that if they report "mystery drones" they get to write multiple content-free articles that will generate a lot of attention but if they do the investigative work they'll find a boring answer that costs them attention. Journalism in America being an industry that converts your attention into money.
> The NJ and NY port authorities have an existing agreement as of Feb 2024 to allow for experimentation and buildout of drone-based last mile delivery systems.
And if this were the reason for these particular drones the NJ and NY port authorities don't really have any reason not to just come forward and state as much. You'd think they'd be more than happy to crow about their "innovation hub" and the work they are doing. They've already gone to the trouble of having their Media Relations staff write up the article you cited. Why waste an opportunity certain to have a greater reach now?
Journalists didn't generate this attention, the drones themselves did. The public is genuinely interested and concerned. Journalists may be capitalizing on what the public is already wanting to learn more about, but I don't think they're avoiding investigative work for fear of the public losing interest. There is simply no one they could ask who would be willing to provide them with the truth.
Any journalist who did somehow manage to get the real story would pull the attention from all the other journalists without answers so they've got the incentive, just not the means. All they really can do is repeat what little they are told to a public which has been asking them to give them that information while also pandering to their audience with whatever speculation they think their viewers/readers will want to hear. A large part of journalism in America is entertainment after all. They wont waste this opportunity since they absolutely want attention and money, but they can't take the blame for "content free articles" when no one is willing to provide them with anything but speculation and more questions.
