Was Blue Origin’s all-female spaceflight faked? Internet erupts over Katy Perry’s hair, Gayle King’s hand

Did Blue Origin fake its all-female spaceflight? Internet sleuths question footage of Katy Perry, Gayle King

Blue Origin‘s recent all-female spaceflight, widely hailed as a landmark moment in space tourism and gender representation, is now facing a barrage of online conspiracy theories. The NS-31 mission, which flew on April 14, 2025, included a high-profile crew of six women—singer Katy Perry, journalist Gayle King, aerospace engineer Aisha Bowe, activist Amanda Nguyen, film producer Kerianne Flynn, and pilot Lauren Sánchez. But despite the celebratory tone from official channels, online skeptics have taken issue with specific visuals from the flight footage, prompting viral claims that the launch was staged.

The mission, operated by Jeff Bezos‘ Blue Origin aboard its New Shepard rocket, marked the company’s 31st flight and the first to feature an all-female crew. The 11-minute suborbital journey aimed to promote diversity in space travel and further commercial interest in space tourism. Yet the significance of the event is now overshadowed by a growing wave of speculation centered around alleged inconsistencies in the broadcasted visuals.

Why is Katy Perry’s hair causing a stir?

A central point of contention has been footage of Katy Perry inside the spacecraft, where her hair appears to remain almost perfectly in place during the moments of weightlessness. Internet users quickly circulated comparisons to earlier microgravity videos, notably featuring former NASA astronaut Sunita Williams, whose hair floated visibly in zero-gravity environments aboard the International Space Station.

This contrast fueled suggestions that Perry and her fellow passengers were not truly experiencing weightlessness or that the flight may have been simulated using green screens or CGI. Experts, however, refuted these claims. Aerospace engineers explained that short-duration suborbital flights like those conducted by Blue Origin only experience a few minutes of microgravity—typically less than four minutes. Furthermore, the tightly styled hair, combined with the use of hair products prior to launch, could account for the reduced motion seen in the footage.

Was Gayle King’s hand digitally altered?

Another widely circulated clip shows what appears to be Gayle King’s hand “disappearing” momentarily in the video feed. Critics used this anomaly to support theories that the footage was digitally manipulated or created in a studio setting. However, video analysts and digital forensics experts suggest that the visual effect is most likely a compression artifact—an occasional glitch that occurs during low-latency live streaming when multiple moving elements overwhelm the data encoding.

These types of compression issues are common in fast-moving or dynamic scenes and can cause elements to momentarily appear distorted or “vanish” due to frame interpolation. Experts argue this is not evidence of CGI but a technical limitation of real-time broadcast compression.

Why did the hatch appear to open from inside?

Another focal point of the conspiracy theories revolves around the moment the spacecraft hatch opened after landing. Online critics pointed to footage where the hatch seemed to move slightly before Blue Origin personnel officially opened it from the outside. This led to claims that the crew may have been already outside the capsule or that the hatch sequence was staged.

Industry experts familiar with the New Shepard vehicle clarified that the hatch is designed to be operable both from the inside and outside. As a precautionary safety measure, crew members are trained to release internal pressure seals in advance of ground crew arrival, which could explain the perceived internal movement. There is no evidence suggesting deviation from standard operating protocols.

Is there any evidence supporting a hoax?

Despite the wave of conspiracy theories, no concrete evidence has surfaced to support claims that the Blue Origin NS-31 flight was fabricated. The mission was broadcast live and accompanied by real-time telemetry data, external camera footage, and post-landing interviews. The event was also attended by family members and journalists, many of whom were present at the West Texas launch site.

Analysts point out that suborbital flights like those conducted by Blue Origin are routinely monitored by third-party observers and regulatory bodies such as the Federal Aviation Administration. Any attempt to stage such a flight would involve substantial risk of exposure, especially given the number of people involved.

What are the broader implications of the backlash?

The backlash against the Blue Origin flight reflects a broader trend of public skepticism toward space travel narratives, especially those involving celebrity participants. While much of the discourse is driven by legitimate curiosity, the amplification of misleading visual cues on social media has increasingly blurred the line between critical inquiry and conspiracy theory.

Experts warn that the spread of misinformation undermines both public trust in commercial spaceflight and the broader goals of making space more inclusive. The presence of an all-female crew was intended to highlight gender representation in a traditionally male-dominated field. Critics argue that reducing the mission to a spectacle of internet speculation risks overshadowing this core message.

How has Blue Origin responded?

As of this writing, Blue Origin has not issued a direct statement addressing the conspiracy theories. However, supporters of the mission—including some participants—have commented indirectly, expressing pride in the experience and encouraging young women to pursue careers in science and aerospace.

Public figures such as Amanda Nguyen and Aisha Bowe, both with STEM and advocacy backgrounds, have continued to highlight the educational purpose of the mission. Meanwhile, Lauren Sánchez, who piloted the flight, posted a video montage emphasizing the mission’s legacy for women in aviation and space exploration.

What’s next for Blue Origin and suborbital tourism?

The NS-31 flight marks a milestone for Blue Origin as it resumes crewed suborbital launches following a pause in 2022 due to a booster failure. With the success of this mission—despite the noise online—Blue Origin is expected to continue advancing its commercial space tourism offerings while also competing with Virgin Galactic and SpaceX in the increasingly crowded private space sector.

Investor sentiment around space tourism has been mixed, particularly as scrutiny grows over environmental impact, regulatory oversight, and commercial viability. Nonetheless, the successful return to flight helps strengthen Blue Origin’s position in the market, particularly if it can continue showcasing missions with broader social impact.

More than just visuals

While the conspiracy theories around Blue Origin’s all-female flight have garnered significant attention, they appear rooted more in speculation than fact. Experts continue to affirm the authenticity of the NS-31 mission, while noting that short suborbital flights produce different visual outcomes than orbital missions. In an age where deepfakes and CGI are increasingly sophisticated, public scrutiny of media is inevitable—but so too is the need for critical media literacy. For now, the legacy of NS-31 lies not in fringe debates but in its pioneering step toward representation in space.