How a Simple Word Fuels Panic and Conspiracy Theories

The power of “the” is insidious. “They” or “these” are similar, in that they refer to “the” phenomenon – whatever that may be. The word “the”—a seemingly innocuous definite article—has an outsized impact on how people interpret events, often creating false assumptions about unity, coordination, or anomaly where none may exist. When people say something like, “They’re not up there normally,” in reference to recent drone sightings, they inadvertently highlight a linguistic phenomenon that has been shaping public perception and driving conspiracy theories for years. This same linguistic shortcut played a key role in amplifying fear during the COVID-19 pandemic and continues to distort how we view everything from vaccines to drones.

Let’s explore how “the” drives misunderstanding, panic, and conspiracy thinking, and what we can do about it.

The Linguistic Power of “The”

The word “the” is a definite article that implies specificity and singularity. It subtly directs our brains to think about a single, unified phenomenon rather than a diverse or unrelated collection of events.

Examples of Misleading Singularization:

• “The pandemic” suggests there was only one virus at play, when in fact multiple strains (and other illnesses) coexisted.
• “The vaccine” implies one monolithic solution, obscuring the reality that many vaccines with different technologies were developed.
• “The drones” suggests a coordinated swarm or unified operation, rather than a mix of consumer drones, airplanes, and other aerial phenomena.

While efficient for communication, this linguistic shortcut erases nuance and reinforces oversimplified narratives.

How “The” Fuels Panic

Using “the” where it doesn’t belong creates a false sense of coherence and intentionality. This is especially problematic when combined with incomplete data or overconfident claims.

Case Study: Drone Sightings

The recent surge in drone-related concerns highlights how “the” shapes perception:

• Statements like “the drones are everywhere” imply all sightings are connected, as if a single coordinated swarm is responsible.
• Public officials, like the New Jersey mayor, say things like, “They’re not up there normally,” even though there’s no prior airspace monitoring data to establish what “normal” even is.
• In reality, millions of drones and airplanes are in U.S. airspace at any given time. The increase in sightings is more likely due to heightened public attention and new technologies for sharing videos, not an actual anomaly.

Without acknowledging the lack of historical baselines, such statements fuel conspiratorial thinking and public panic.

The COVID-19 Parallel

The same linguistic phenomenon drove much of the fear and confusion during the early days of the COVID-19 pandemic:

• “The virus” created the impression that SARS-CoV-2 was the only virus circulating, ignoring the existence of other coronaviruses, flu strains, and co-infections.
• “The vaccine” misled people into thinking there was only one option, when in fact there were multiple vaccines, each with its own strengths and weaknesses.
• Increased testing revealed cases of SARS-CoV-2, but without prior surveillance data, it was impossible to contextualize how its prevalence compared to other viruses before the pandemic.

The lack of comparative data, combined with definitive language, created the illusion of unprecedented danger and unity, when the reality was far more complex.

How “The” Drives Conspiracy Thinking

The definite article doesn’t just oversimplify; it actively feeds conspiratorial thinking by:

• Encouraging False Patterns: Singular language, like “the drones” or “the virus,” suggests all events are connected, which primes people to see coordination where none exists.
• Reinforcing Credibility Gaps: Statements like “They’re not up there normally” assume prior knowledge of airspace activity, which often doesn’t exist. This inconsistency erodes trust and fuels suspicion.
• Amplifying Social Media Hysteria: Viral posts use definitive language to attract attention, turning unrelated events into “proof” of larger conspiracies.

How New Monitoring Systems Create the Illusion of Change

Both drone sightings and COVID-19 testing highlight how new observation tools distort perception:

• Increased Visibility: Monitoring systems reveal phenomena that were always present but unnoticed, creating a false sense of increase. More drones being spotted doesn’t mean there are more drones; it means people are paying more attention.
• Lack of Historical Context: Without prior data, it’s impossible to determine what’s “normal.” Statements like “They’re not up there normally” are speculative at best and misleading at worst.

This dynamic drives the feedback loop of panic:

1. New monitoring reveals more phenomena.
2. People assume the increase is new or intentional.
3. Language like “the drones” reinforces the illusion of coordination or anomaly.

Solutions: Using Language to Combat Panic

To break this cycle of fear and misunderstanding, we need to rethink how we communicate:

1. Avoid Over-Simplifications: Replace phrases like “the drones” with more nuanced language, such as:
   • “Multiple drones of various types have been reported.”
   • “Unconfirmed sightings of drones in certain areas.”
2. Acknowledge Uncertainty: Officials should admit when they lack historical baselines, e.g., “We don’t know how this compares to past activity because we haven’t monitored it before.”
3. Encourage Critical Thinking: Help the public ask better questions, such as:
   • “Are these sightings coordinated, or are they unrelated?”
   • “How does this compare to previous years?”
4. Media Responsibility: Journalists should contextualize new phenomena within broader trends, avoiding language that exaggerates or sensationalizes.

The Danger of Overly Confident, Prematurely Definitive Language

The word “the” seems harmless, but its misuse can distort public understanding and drive unnecessary panic. From drones to COVID-19, definitive language simplifies complex realities into singular narratives, feeding conspiracy theories and eroding trust.

By being more intentional with our words and acknowledging the complexity of what we observe, we can foster a better-informed public and prevent the false narratives that so often lead to fear and confusion.