Space has a communication problem
Space operators know their world so well that they've forgotten that others don't.
This newsletter was brought to you by Sonder London. We like to hear from our readers. So if you have any feedback or story suggestions, get in touch. And thanks for reading.
In Space News, our creative director, Harry Readhead, argues that space has a communication problem:
‘The space sector today seems to be afflicted with what Stephen Pinker calls “the curse of knowledge”: space operators know their world so well that they have forgotten that others do not. Once you know something, it is difficult to remember what it was like not to know it. The effect is intensified when we spend too much time with people just like ourselves: sharing the same assumptions, the same vocab, the same frame of reference. As Wittgenstein puts it somewhere, a picture held us captive; and a picture holds space professionals captive. In respect of language and communication, they are locked inside a particular conceptual framework. The upshot, for people working in space, is often to speak and write in a way that, to the ordinary man on the street, confuses rather than clarifies. …
At the risk of making wild generalizations (why stop now?) European space operators in particular should take note of all this. Europe has other, more pressing issues, which chiefly have to do with funding its startups and driving defense innovation. But it does need to think about how it speaks to the world. Our friends across the pond have a far more richly developed communication culture, and by and large will think about how to get their message out there from the word go. It is admirable, in a way, that Europeans are so reluctant to talk about their work; we would all like to live in a world in which reputation follows character and competence. But the internet has condemned us all to live in an attention economy, and quietly getting on with the job won’t always do.’
For Project Syndicate, Pierre du Rostu, CEO of AXA Digital Commercial Platform, argues that insurers should look to space to close the ‘protection gap’ caused by the crises facing today’s world:
‘According to the European Investment Bank (EIB), every euro spent on prevention saves €5-7 in recovery costs. This points to a strong economic argument for insurers to shift their approach. By becoming active risk managers, rather than passive payers of claims, insurers would go a long way toward closing the protection gap.
The tools to do this already exist. Perhaps the most powerful is geospatial technology, which tracks risks in real time by using AI-powered tools to analyze data from satellite imagery and drones. Instead of relying on outdated models that are often based on decades-old historical data, insurers can use this technology to pinpoint which properties, businesses, or assets are especially vulnerable to natural disasters.
With this knowledge, both insurers and policyholders can act before catastrophe strikes. One might argue that little can be done for a home in the path of a wildfire. But this is not entirely true. The United Nations Office for Disaster Risk Reduction has shown that clearing dry vegetation around homes reduces the risk of wildfire damage. If insurers use geospatial data to identify at-risk areas, they and their clients can take simple steps – removing brush, building with fire-resistant materials, and even deploying private firefighting teams once a blaze has started – that could save billions of dollars in losses.’
In BBC Wildlife, Sophie Ellis and Simon Ward describe how space companies like Kayrros are using Earth observation to protect animals and habitats:
‘Those tireless satellites, spinning around our planet at unimaginable speeds, are acting as guardians of some of its most vulnerable inhabitants. Whether tracking the migratory journeys of bar-tailed godwits, flying 29,000km without so much as a rest stop, or a tiger threading its way through fragmented forests in Asia, satellites are one of conservation’s sharpest tools – ever watchful, precise and unflinchingly reliable.
“Space technology gives us the ability to assess the health of forests, track deforestation, predict wildfires and measure the full extent of the human influence on landscapes and wildlife habitats,” explains Antoine Rostand, president and co-founder of satellite and enviro-intelligence firm Kayrros. “We can apply it anywhere on the planet and we can use it non-intrusively – there’s not always the need to put boots on the ground and disturb the environment to get a comprehensive read on local conditions.”
It’s a striking thought that, from an office in Paris, Rostand’s team can zoom down into the Amazon basin and pinpoint a single fire glowing beneath the dense canopy. A farmer’s controlled burn or the first flickers of illegal logging? The satellites hold the evidence and their findings ripple outwards, shaping decisions and ecosystems in ways that may echo for generations.’
In Defence Industry Europe, Dr. Robert Brüll argues that conflict demands innovation:
‘Europe is persisting with an old, tired model. Why? Because it’s peaceful. Europe is the world’s single greatest peace project. A continent whose history has been marked by near-constant infighting decided, in the wake of two world wars, that enough was enough. A culture of peace prevailed. Disagreements were handled by politicians and rivalries were indulged on the football pitch. So allergic have we been to conflict that most defence budgets, until recently, have always been on the chopping block, and private investors still flinch at the notion of investing in military applications. Europeans should be proud of this. But we also have to recognise that at this moment in our history, the phrase ‘Si vis pacem, para bellum’ applies. If you want peace, prepare for war. …
In Europe, the government must become an enabler, not a controller, of the defence innovation process. Instead of relying solely on traditional procurement systems, it must foster a public–private partnership that accelerates the creation and deployment of new forms of technology. It must use its imagination, as Ukraine has done, strengthening cooperation between the military and the developers to refine technology. The BRAVE1 initiative lets Ukraine’s front-line forces give real-time feedback to developers, which makes sure that all new technology is battlefield-tested and refined at record speed.’
In Space News, Jason Rainbow reports that space companies are not immune from Donald Trump’s ‘far-reaching trade war’:
‘Shares of UFO, an exchange-traded fund (ETF) holding an international mix of 30 space companies, have fallen 12% following U.S. President Trump’s global import tax announcement April 2.
That’s a steeper decline than the S&P 500, which has experienced its biggest drop in years, although some space companies outperformed the broader market.
Shares in Rocket Lab and Viasat, the largest U.S.-based holdings in UFO’s portfolio, have fallen 15% and 13%, respectively.
It’s a “baby out with the bathwater type of scenario,” said Andrew Chanin, CEO of the UFO manager ProcureAM.’
On Space.com, Samantha Mathewson reports that the all-female Blue Origin spaceflight is getting some stick:
‘During a recent appearance on "TODAY with Jenna & Friends," actress Olivia Munn criticized the private spaceflight mission, questioning its value given the economic hardships facing many people in the U.S. and around the world.
Munn highlighted what she sees as the extravagance of the endeavor, pointing out that participants are reportedly receiving full glam preparations, and questioned the necessity and purpose of the 11-minute space expedition aboard Blue Origin's New Shepard vehicle, USA Today reported. …
Blue Origin has not published its ticket prices. But its main competitor in the suborbital space tourism industry, Virgin Galactic, has done so; it currently charges $600,000 per seat.’