MIT Technology Review
Technology Review is a magazine affiliated with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. It was originally founded in 1899 and was re-launched on April 23, 1998. Before re-launch, the editor stated that "nothing will be left of the old magazine except the name." It is therefore necessary to distinguish between the modern and the historical Technology Review.
The modern magazine, "MIT's Magazine of Innovation," covers new technology and how it gets commercialized; is mass-marketed to the public; and is targetted at senior executives, researchers, financiers, and policymakers, as well as for the MIT alumni.[1] The historical magazine was published by the MIT Alumni Association; was more closely aligned with the interests of MIT alumni; and had a more intellectual tone and a much smaller public circulation.
The modern Technology Review
The modern Technology Review bills itself as "MIT's Magazine of Innovation." Since 2001 it has been published by Technology Review Inc., a nonprofit independent media company owned by MIT.[2]
Intended to appeal to business leaders, editor John Benditt said in 1999, "We're really about new technologies and how they get commercialized." Technology Review covers breakthroughs and current issues on fields such as biotechnology, nanotechnology, and computing. Articles are also devoted to more mature disciplines such as energy, telecommunications, transportation, and the military.
Technology Review is distributed as a regular mass-market magazine and appears on newstands. In 2003 circulation was 315,000[3], about half that of Scientific American, and included 220,000 paid subscribers and 95,000 sent free to MIT alumni.
Technology Review also functions as the MIT alumni magazine; the edition sent to alumni contains a separate section, "MIT News," containing items such as alumni class notes. This section is not included in the edition distributed to the general public.
The relationship between the current magazine and MIT is not as direct as that of the historical publication, but is still close. It identifies itself as "An MIT Enterprise," MIT's website lists it as an MIT publication, and the MIT News Office states that "the magazine often uses MIT expertise for some of its content." The Boston Globe noted in 1999 [4] that (apart from the alumni section) "few Technology Review articles actually concern events or research at MIT." However, in the words of editor Jason Pontin[5]:
- Our job is not to promote MIT; but we analyse and explain emerging technologies, and because we believe that new technologies are, generally speaking, a good thing, we do indirectly promote MIT's core activity: that is, the development of innovative technology.
Since 1997, R. Bruce Journey has held the title of "publisher," the first full-time publisher in the magazine's history; Journey is also the president and CEO of Technology Review, Inc. Editors-in-chief have included John Benditt (1997), Robert Buderi (2002), and Jason Pontin (2004).
The magazine has won numerous Folio! awards, presented at the annual magazine publishing trade show conducted by Folio! magazine. In 2001, these included a "Silver Folio: Editorial Excellence Award" in the consumer science and technology magazine category and many awards for typography and design. [6]
On June 6 2001, Fortune and CNET Networks launched a publication entitled FORTUNE/CNET Technology Review [7]. MIT sued[8] FORTUNE's parent corporation, Time, Inc. for infringement of the Technology Review trademark[9]. The case was quickly settled. In August the MIT student newspaper reported,
- lawyers for MIT and Time were reluctant to discuss the case, citing a confidentiality agreement that both sides described as very restrictive. Jason Kravitz, a Boston attorney who represented MIT in the case, suggested that the magazine’s change of name to Fortune/CNET Tech Review, a change that occurred in the middle of the case, may have been part of the settlement. [10]
Many publications covering specific technologies have used "technology review" as part of their names, such as Lawrence Livermore Labs's Energy & Technology Review, AACE's Educational Technology Review, and the IAEA's Nuclear Technology Review.
In 2005, Technology Review, along with Wired News and other technology publications, was embarrassed by the publication of a number of stories by freelancer Michelle Delio containing information which could not be corroborated. Editor-in-chief Pontin said, "Of the ten stories which were published, only three were entirely accurate. In two of the stories, I'm fairly confident that Michelle Delio either did not speak to the person she said she spoke to, or misrepresented her interview with him." [11] The stories were retracted.
The historical Technology Review
Technology Review was founded in 1899 and currently claims to be "the oldest technology magazine in the world."[12]
In 1899 The New York Times commented:[13]
- We give a cordial welcome to No. 1 of Vol. I of The Technology Review, a Quarterly Magazine Relating to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, published in Boston, and under charge of the Association of Class Secretaries. As far as make-up goes, cover, paper, typography and illustrations are in keeping with the strong characteristics of the Institution it represents. This magazine, as its editors announce, is intended to be "a clearing house of information and thought," and, as far as the Institute of Technology is concerned, "to increase its power, to minimize its waste, to insure among its countless friends the most perfect co-operation."
The career path of James R. Killian illustrates just how close were the ties between Technology Review and the Institute. In 1926, Killian graduated from college and got his first job as assistant managing editor of Technology Review; he rose to editor-in-chief; became executive assistant to then-president Karl Taylor Compton in 1939; vice-president of MIT in 1945; and succeeded Compton as president in 1949.
The May 4 1929 issue contained an article by Dr. Norbert Weiner, then Assistant Professor of Mathematics, describing some deficiencies in a paper Albert Einstein had published earlier that year. Weiner also commented on a cardinal's critique of the Einstein theory saying:
- The pretended incomprehensibility of the Einstein theory has been used as capital by professional anti-Einsteinians. Without prejudice to the cause of religion, I may remark that theological discussions have not at all times been distinguished by their character of lucidity.
The historical Technology Review often published articles that were controversial, or critical of certain technologies. A 1980 issue contained an article by Jerome V. Wiesner attacking the Reagan administration's nuclear defense strategy. The cover of a 1983 issue stated "Even if the fusion program produces a reactor, no one will want it," and contained an article by Lawrence M. Lidsky, associate director of MIT's Plasma Fusion Center, challenging the feasibility of fusion power (which at the time was often fancied to be just around the corner). The May 1984 issue contained an expose about microchip manufacturing hazards.
As late as 1967. the New York Times described Technology Review as a "scientific journal." Of its writing style, writer George V. Higgins complained:
- Technology Review, according to [then-editor] Stephen Marcus... [subjects] its scientific contributors to rewrite rigors that would give fainting spells to the most obstreperous cub reporter. Marcus believes this produces readable prose on arcane subjects. I don't agree.[14]
In 1984, Technology Review printed an article about a Russian scientist using ova from frozen mammoths to create a mammoth-elephant hybrid called a "mammontelephas."[15]. Apart from being dated "April 1, 1984," there were no obvious giveaways in the story. The Chicago Tribune News Service picked it up as a real news item, and it was printed as fact in hundreds of newspapers.
The prank was presumably forgotten by 1994, when a survey of "opinion leaders" ranked Technology Review No. 1 in the nation in the "most credible" category. [16]
Contributors to the magazine also included Thomas A. Edison, Winston Churchill, and Tim Berners-Lee. [17]
Transition to the modern magazine
A radical transition occurred in 1996. At that time, according to the Boston Business Journal,[18] in 1996 Technology Review had lost $1.6 million over the previous seven years and was "facing the possibility of folding" due to "years of declining advertising revenue."
R. Bruce Journey was named publisher, the first full-time publisher the magazine had ever had. According to previous publisher William J. Hecht, although Technology Review had "long been highly regarded for its editorial excellence," the purpose of appointing Journey was to enhance its "commercial potential" and "secure a prominent place for Technology Review in the competitive world of commercial publishing."[19] John Benditt replaced Steven J. Marcus as editor-in-chief, the entire staff was fired, and the modern Technology Review was born.
Boston Globe columnist David Warsh[20] described the transition by saying that the magazine had been serving up "old 1960s views of things: humanist, populist, ruminative, suspicious of the unseen dimensions of new technologies" and had now been replaced with one that "takes innovation seriously and enthusiastically." Former editor Marcus characterized the magazine's new stance as "cheerleading for innovation."
By 2003, circulation had more than tripled (from 92,000 to 315,000). According to The New York Times [21], as of 2004 the magazine was still "partly financed by M.I.T. (though it is expected to turn a profit eventually)."
Notes
- ^ Technology Review 108(9)6, September, 2005, "About Technology Review"
- ^ Mass. corporation #803209
- ^ TR Enhanced, by Robert Buderi
- ^ Boston Globe, April 25, 1999 p. G1 "MIT Tech Magazine, On Plateau, Finds Killer App: Commercialism"
- ^ Jason Pontin, personal email to Dpbsmith, August 27, 2005
- ^ Technology Review wins six awards, MIT News office.
- ^ FORTUNE and CNET Networks launch joint technology review
- ^ "MIT sues Time Inc. over magazine name", Boston Business Journal, June 18, 2001
- ^ Trademark registration 0668713, registered October 21 1958 to "Alumni Association of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology" and renewed in 1999.
- ^ MIT Finishes Three Lawsuits The Tech, August 3, 2002
- ^ Boston Globe, April 22, 2005, p. C3 "More of Writer's Stories Faulted—MIT Says Just 3 of 10 were Accurate"
- ^ The New York Times, January 21, 1899, page BR33
- ^ Retrobreeding the Woolly Mammoth, reproduction of text of 1984 April Fool's article
- ^ Technology Review rated 'most credible'. Survey was conducted by the opinion research firm Erdos & Morgan.
- ^ Boston Globe, July 17, 1982.
- ^ MIT's 'TR' undergoes revamp, Boston Business Journal, April 10, 1998
- ^ Boston Globe, April 25, 1999 p. G1
- ^ http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/1996/journey-0501.html
- ^ However, Scientific American has been published continuously since 1845, and Popular Science since 1872. In the personal communication cited above, Pontin says that the claim rests on the definition of a magazine as being perfect-bound, Scientific American being in newspaper tabloid format in 1899.
- ^ Boston Globe, April 21, 1998 p. C1 "Gloom, Doom and Boom at MIT." Warsh analogized the old TR with beloved departed Cambridge eateries like the F&T Deli.
- ^ The New York Times, November 10, 2004, p. 8, "Glossy Alumni Magazines Seek More Than Graduates"