Several major mainstream outlets reported a claim from Norway’s Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s plane was “almost hit by a drone as it was about to take off from Moldova” on Tuesday, though a review of available mainstream reporting and official government accounts suggests the claim is untrue.
Even though most outlets prominently attributed the claim to Støre, many appeared to seize on the opportunity for an eye-popping headline without attempting to do their own reporting or highlight relevant context.
Outlets like Fox News (Right), The Independent (Lean Left), and Euronews (Center) were among those who authored the most misleading coverage, while The New York Times (Lean Left) and Reuters (Center) offered the most measured coverage.
Norwegian PM Makes Misinformed Original Claim
Prime Minister Støre reportedly first made the claim to Norwegian public broadcaster NRK on Wednesday, following Zelenskyy’s visit to Oslo for the funeral of Norway’s King Harald V.
Støre told NRK, “His flight was almost hit by a drone when it was taking off from Moldova. That is the reality he lives in.”
Støre did not give specifics, and neither Zelenskyy nor other Ukrainian officials have publicly commented on the alleged incident.
Follow-Up Reporting From Mainstream Outlets
On September 9, French outlet AFP (Not rated), Ukrainian outlet The Kyiv Independent (Center bias), Financial Times (Center), and CNN (Lean Left) reported speaking to additional sources and published new information.
The four reports offered conflicting portraits of what happened based on mostly anonymous sourcing.
AFP said it spoke to “a source in the Ukrainian presidency” who described the claim that Zelenskyy was at risk as “exaggerated.” The source added, “It was an alert in Moldova when a Russian [drone] entered Moldovan and Romanian airspace.”
The Kyiv Independent said it spoke to “a source” who said, in the publication’s words, a Russian drone “nearly hit President Volodymyr Zelensky's plane as it was departing from Moldova.” The outlet did not provide any direct quotes or further context on what kind of “source” it spoke to.
Financial Times said “a senior Ukrainian official aboard the plane with Zelenskyy confirmed” Prime Minister Støre’s claim.
CNN was the only of the four that published an original scoop that didn’t rely on anonymous sourcing. CNN reported that Moldovan ambassador to the US, Vladislav Kulminski, said it was “too early to say” whether the drone was specifically targeting Zelenskyy.
AllSides has previously observed all four outlets as displaying pro-Ukraine biases.
The Official Moldovan Government Narrative
The only official government narrative so far on the incident has come from Moldova. Romania’s defense ministry also contributed reporting to the timeline of events.
On September 10, Moldovan state news agency Moldpres highlighted a clarification from government spokesperson Dumitru Ciorici:
Moldpres wrote, “[Ciorici] said that the country's airspace was temporarily closed on the afternoon of September 8, after 4:30 p.m., following the detection of a Russian drone that had entered the country without authorization from the direction of Ukraine… Later, after 5:20 p.m., the authorities received confirmation that the drone had exploded on the ground in the area of the village of Mihăilenii Vechi, in Rîșcani district, approximately 160 kilometers from Chișinău International Airport. Following this confirmation, the flight restrictions were lifted.”
It added that Norwegian PM Støre “did not specify the source of the information or how close the drone was to the plane.”
Judging from official government releases, AllSides has deduced the following timeline of events for September 8:
4:20 p.m.* - Moldova detected a drone in its airspace “from the direction of the village of Slavianorebca, Ukraine, moving towards Bender”
4:30 p.m. - Moldova temporarily closed its airspace
4:32 p.m. - Moldova detected the drone “moving towards Chișinău”
4:33 p.m. - Romania detected the drone “west of Chișinău” continuing westward
4:36 p.m. - Moldova detected the drone near Bălănești, heading west towards Cetireni
4:37 p.m.** - Moldova said the drone “left” Moldovan airspace near Zagarancea, headed “towards” Golăiești, Romania.
-
4:37 p.m.** - Romania said the drone “entered” its airspace “30 km southeast” of Iași
4:39 p.m. - Romania said two NATO jets were deployed to monitor the drone
4:44 p.m. - Romania detected the drone “heading further inland”
4:48 p.m. - Romania detected the drone 18 km north of the city of Roman
5:02 p.m. - Romania lost track of the drone “between” Iași and Botoșani counties
-
5:08 p.m. - Romania detected the drone in Moldovan airspace
5:14 p.m. - Moldova said the drone disappeared in Sturzovca, west of Bălți
5:26 p.m. - Moldova learned the drone had “fallen” near Mihăileni Vechi
5:39 p.m. - Moldova reopened airspace over Chișinău
Sources: Moldovan Ministry of Defense, Romanian Ministry of National Defense, Moldpres
*AllSides was unable to determine where “Slavianorebca, Ukraine” is, and presumes it is a spelling error. A Google search query for “Slavianorebca, Ukraine” only returned results related to this drone incursion. There is a rural settlement near the Ukrainian border named Slov'yanoserbka that the Moldovan Ministry of Defense may have been referring to.
**The Romanian and Moldovan ministries’ reports at 4:37 p.m. appear to contradict each other. Golăiești is located about 12 km northeast of Iași. Moldova’s defense ministry said the drone was a “Shahed-type,” and public broadcaster Moldova 1 said it was a “Geran,” Russia’s own version of it. The fastest Geran model is widely reported to be able to travel up to 10 km per minute. Mainstream outlets said Ukrainian open-source channels reported that the drone was a Geran-4, which can travel up to 8 km per minute.
The New York Times Adds New Context
The New York Times (Lean Left) got in touch with the Moldovan government and published its own original reporting on September 10 titled, “Russian Drone Incursion Delayed Zelensky Flight to Oslo, Moldova Says.”
Key novel pieces of reporting included:
- “It was not immediately clear what had caused the drone to fall to the ground, and Moldova’s government did not say whether the incursion constituted a direct threat to Mr. Zelensky.”
- “Mr. Zelensky’s office declined to comment.”
- “The Moldovan authorities did not confirm a claim made on Wednesday by Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre of Norway that Mr. Zelensky’s plane ‘was almost hit by a drone as it was about to take off from Moldova.’”
- The Times said that according to Moldovan presidential adviser Olga Rosca, “17 similar incursions” into Moldovan airspace happened “in August alone.” Though Rosca told this specifically to The Times, it appears to be a relayed detail from Moldovan Prime Minister Vasile Tofan.
Other key context highlighted in The Times’ report:
- “Ukraine’s public broadcaster, Suspilne, citing an unnamed official in Mr. Zelensky’s office, reported that two Russian drones had flown into Moldova at about the time his plane was scheduled to take off for Oslo.”
- “Bhanuja Rasia, a spokeswoman for Mr. Støre’s office, said in a statement on Thursday that… it was ‘unclear if any drones were close to the aircraft.’”
How Major Western Media Outlets Covered the Drone Incursion
In addition to those that offered significant original reporting, many major Western mainstream outlets quickly published headlines on September 9 and 10 based on Norwegian PM Støre’s claims. Few outlets included significant context in their article bodies on what actually happened, and several authored outright misleading coverage.
Among them were some of the biggest news outlets in the world, like Fox News (Right), CBS News (Lean Left), CNN (Lean Left), Washington Post (Lean Left), Reuters (Center), BBC News (Center), Al Jazeera (Lean Left), The Telegraph (Center), Breitbart (Right), Euronews (Center), The Washington Times (Lean Right), and DW News (Center).
Though most major outlets correctly attributed the claim that Zelenskyy’s plane was “almost hit” to Norway’s PM Støre, most offered short pieces of coverage that didn’t go much deeper.
It should be noted that the official reports from the Moldovan and Romanian governments were published on September 8 and 9 and were hence available at the time of publishing for most outlets.
Still, almost none of these outlets referenced them or followed up with the Norwegian, Moldovan, Romanian, or Ukrainian governments.
Misleading Coverage
Some of the most misleading and/or incomplete coverage came from Fox News, The Independent, and Euronews.
Fox News’ coverage was the most slanted and misleading. In its opening paragraph, Fox obscured the sourcing of the claim that Zelenskyy’s plane was “almost hit” by citing Reuters as the source. Though it linked to the article and then included the quote from Støre in the next paragraph, it said Støre “told public broadcaster NRK about the incident,” leading the reader to do a bit of guesswork about who originally made the claim.
Fox then went on to say twice that the drone “landed” in Moldova “north of the capital.” By saying the drone “landed,” Fox didn’t make it clear that the drone crashed and was therefore no longer a threat, though it did say the drone started a fire. Also, it left out that the drone “landed” 158 km away from Chișinău, giving the reader the opportunity to believe that it “landed” much closer to the capital and potentially was a bigger threat than it actually was.
For context, Mihăileni Vechi, where the drone was recovered, sits 32 km north of Moldova’s second-biggest city, Bălți. Reporting that the drone “landed in a field north of the capital” does almost nothing in terms of accurately portraying to readers what actually happened.
The Independent published a very brief bulletin on the news. It noted that the drone crashed very far from Chișinău, though it said Norwegian PM Støre “confirmed” that Zelenskyy’s plane was “almost hit.” This is misleading, because he was the only person to claim this, making it redundant and arguably confusing to say he confirmed his own claim.
Euronews’ coverage went into a bit more detail and offered key events from the timelines reported by the Romanian and Moldovan defense ministries, but its headline was misleading.
Euronews wrote, “Timeline: How a Russian drone nearly hit Zelenskyy's plane in Moldova.” By not putting quotes around “almost hit”, or mentioning the Norwegian PM in the headline, Euronews is effectively reporting this as its own claim, or a statement of fact. Furthermore, in the opening lines of its coverage, it said Støre “revealed that Zelenskyy’s plane had almost been hit by a drone,” framing it as a confirmed truth.
Slightly Better
Other outlets, while still often lacking a fair amount of context, at least gave readers a less sensational view of the situation, and in some cases, a little room to reach their own conclusions on whether they believe Zelenskyy’s plane was actually “almost hit.”
Among these outlets were Al Jazeera, DW News, CBS News, BBC News, The Telegraph, and The Washington Post.
Al Jazeera was one of the first major outlets to report on Støre’s claims on September 9. The outlet didn’t give much context or appear to do much digging, but it properly attributed the claim to Støre in its headline and prominently noted, “Støre did not say what his source was for this information or how close the drone was.”
The Washington Post was slightly more cautious with its headline, “Plane carrying Zelensky threatened by drone in Moldova, Norway’s premier says.” This properly attributes the source of the claim, and even though Støre said the plane was “almost hit,” using the word “threatened” instead of the direct quote treats the claim with a bit of skepticism. Still, The Post didn’t include much additional context.
DW News, CBS News, BBC News, The Washington Times, Breitbart, and The Telegraph all noted in their coverage that AFP reported speaking to a Ukrainian government source who said Støre’s claim was “exaggerated.” DW, The Telegraph, The Washington Times, and CBS all did so prominently. Even though this is an anonymously sourced claim, it does clue readers in that there may be more to the story than meets the eye from the headline.
The Telegraph could have done a better job with its headline. It wrote, “Zelensky’s plane ‘almost hit’ by Russian drone.” While the outlet got it right by including “almost hit” in quotes to confirm that it’s an outside claim, unlike other outlets, it didn’t mention that it came from Støre until the third paragraph of its coverage.
The Most Direct
Similar to The New York Times, Reuters ran a headline, “Drone alert delayed Zelenskiy's departure for Norway, Moldova says.”
The coverage effectively ran inversely to those of the aforementioned outlets and promoted official statements and verifiable events from the Moldovan government, while including Støre’s claims as a mere piece of context at the very end.
While Reuters didn’t include much context or go digging further, its headline at least avoided the sensationalism and slant that almost all other outlets displayed. Note: The coverage analyzed does not constitute an exhaustive list.
AllSides Analysis
From all of the available original Western media and official government reports, it’s quite clear that Zelenskyy’s plane was not “almost hit” by a drone.
When jointly considering the Moldovan and Romanian defense ministries’ reports, if they are believed to be mostly accurate, the drone was likely never even anywhere near Zelenskyy. If it had a maximum speed of 8 or 10 km per minute, it couldn’t have traveled from the vicinity of Chișinău Airport to Zagarancea, approximately 95 kilometers, in five minutes.
Norway’s Prime Minister Støre didn’t seem to be too concerned – as neither he nor his government have issued any correction or follow-up statement as of September 12 – that he could have been making a false or misleading claim. While it might be a bit much to ask politicians to do a deep dive before making any comments to the media at all – and the relevant information might not have all been available at the time of his comment – he could have offered softer phrasing based on facts he knew were verifiably true.
Instead of saying, “His flight was almost hit by a drone when it was taking off from Moldova. That is the reality he lives in,” he could have said, “His flight was delayed” or “thought to be threatened by a drone when it was taking off from Moldova. That is the reality he lives in.”
The comment would have served the same purpose and painted Zelenskyy in the same light.
What it wouldn’t have done, however, is give major mainstream Western media outlets an opportunity to generate clicks and stir fear with a sensational headline quote that would likely mislead most readers.
Considering the above, there are several key takeaways from this story.
The first is that most mainstream outlets are in the business of generating clicks and shaping narratives. Many of the outlets that covered this story, whether they did a poor or so-so job, published brief pieces of coverage that didn’t add any new information. In most cases, these outlets republished a few core details and used the rest of their coverage to include other information about the conflict in Ukraine, drones, or European geopolitics that wasn’t directly relevant to the day’s news.
While there is nothing journalistically wrong with reporting what a top official said at face value, a short bit of research and inclusion of outside context could have gone a long way in making mainstream coverage more robust and less misleading. This would have also given them more to work with in terms of headline options.
Instead, most outlets ran a headline that suggested Zelenskyy’s plane was “almost hit” by a drone in Moldova – a story that would have been extraordinary, if true.
Even though these outlets accurately reflected what Støre said, The New York Times, which offered exceptionally thorough original reporting, and Reuters were the only major outlets to publish headlines that reflected what actually happened on the ground – the Moldovan airspace was closed, and Zelenskyy’s flight was delayed. While these headlines weren’t as grabbing, they were accurate.
RELATED: How Conservative Western Media Spun a Female Biologist Into a ‘Russian Escort’ | AllSides
Another takeaway is that Western media outlets can easily get away with omitting key context or misleading readers on foreign stories because source reports and materials can be much harder to find. For this story, the reports from the Romanian and Moldovan defense ministries and Moldovan state media were crucial in debunking Støre’s claim.
The measured responses and reporting from Moldova, Romania, and Ukraine stand in sharp contrast to most Western media coverage and Støre’s claim, highlighting a wider theme that is not unique to this story. Western reporters – in this case, those rephrasing other reporting – and politicians often appear not to approach the conflict in Ukraine with the same degree of level-headedness and diligence they would treat certain domestic issues or stories, because they are physically far from it.
Those who are closer to the conflict in Ukraine will presumably be more careful not to make or amplify false claims that could lead to further escalation for seemingly no reason. This does not mean these countries’ governments are immune from knowingly or unknowingly misleading the public to suit their own agendas, but with this story it appears there was little appetite for nonsense.
Additionally, most major mainstream Western outlets have made no bones about their pro-Ukraine biases since the conflict with Russia escalated in 2022. And Prime Minister Støre is no different.
AllSides’ unique value-add to the media landscape is that we take our time to analyze reporting and source materials from many different avenues, and try to give our readers the fullest picture possible. This involves clearly citing where information comes from, what the bias is of those who are reporting it, and combining everything we’ve learned from reputable sources into one convenient place to make it as easily digestible as possible.
Though we’re a small independent team, we work hard to do this every day because after watching the media for long enough, it’s clear that with most big mainstream stories, there is often much more happening than what meets the eye.
Andy Gorel is the Managing Editor of AllSides. He has a Center bias.
This piece was edited and reviewed by Director of Communications and Bias Julie Mastrine (Lean Right) and Design Consultant Joseph Ratliff (Lean Left).
.png.webp)
