Tom Standage - why Technology journalism matters?

Why technology journalism matters Tom Standage, The Economist January 17th 2009

Introduction Tom Standage: Business Editor and Technology Quarterly Editor, The Economist

Introduction About The Economist Global news weekly Circulation: 1.4m 56% of readers in North America 31% in Europe; 10% in Asia 2% in Middle East & Africa

Introduction Why I am a technology journalist “The future is already here… it’s just unevenly distributed.” -- William Gibson And I get to talk to the world’s cleverest people

Introduction 1. The past: How tech journalism has changed 2. The present: How we do it at The Economist 3. The future: Where tech journalism is going

1. The past: How tech journalism has changed

1. How tech journalism has changed Two big stories in the past 15 years have made tech journalism more important than ever: • The rise of the internet • The spread of mobile phones

1. How tech journalism has changed The internet has affected almost every aspect of human life: business, politics, social life (It has changed journalism, too) The internet makes computers useful to almost everyone

1. How tech journalism has changed The internet’s rise created strong demand for people to explain it Economist readers consistently asked for more coverage of its impact on business My route into journalism in 1994!

1. How tech journalism has changed Tech journalists went from writing about gadgets… …to being expected to comment on privacy, censorship, telecoms regulation, competition policy, intellectual property, etc

1. How tech journalism has changed Many early debates have been resolved, and real-world laws and rules have largely been imposed on the internet Journalists helped to frame the debate and influence the outcome, if only by explaining things

1. How tech journalism has changed Nobody still thinks the internet can be “turned off” It is understood that carriers and ISPs are not responsible for their users’ actions

1. How tech journalism has changed Unresolved internet debates: •Net neutrality •Behavioural targeting •Terrorists/Google Earth We still have work to do

1. How tech journalism has changed The spread of mobile phones has affected more people than the rise of the internet The internet supplemented other forms of communication for most users; mobile phones often provide access for the first time

1. How tech journalism has changed

1. How tech journalism has changed Mobile phones have direct impact on economic activity: •Substitute for poor infrastructure (shop in Afghanistan) •Price discovery, market access (fishermen in Kerala) •New uses: mobile banking (M-PESA in Kenya)

1. How tech journalism has changed An extra 10 mobile phones per 100 people in a typical developing country leads to an extra 0.6 percentage points in GDP growth. (Waverman, London Business School, 2005)

1. How tech journalism has changed All governments claim to be pro-growth and pro-connectivity But not all of them have the right policies in place to promote the spread of mobile phones

1. How tech journalism has changed Private firms will build networks if they are given the chance $230 billion invested in telecoms infrastructure in the developing world,1993 - 2003 (World Bank) Not big Western firms: local champions such as Orascom, Investcom, MTN, etc

1. How tech journalism has changed Deregulation is key Ethiopia: 1.4% (one operator) DRC: 10.5% (four operators) But comparable GDP per capita Somalia 7% (no government!)

1. How tech journalism has changed Governments also impose “luxury taxes” on handsets, hindering adoption But done right, mobile telecoms can be a big contributor of taxes (14% in Afghanistan)

1. How tech journalism has changed Unlike with the internet, there is not a thirst to have this explained. But it is important Technology overlaps with economics, regulation and development. Reporting it accurately is more vital than ever

2. The present: How we do it at The Economist

2. How we do it Scientists and technologists like our coverage because: •We get it right, mostly •We explain what they do to their families and friends •We keep them up to date with developments in other fields

2. How we do it We try to be three things in our coverage (not just in our tech coverage): •Broad •Deep •A filter

2. How we do it > Broad We strive to place stories in broader context using: •Overview of the field •Cross-industry comparisons •International comparisons •Historical comparisons Avoid hype. Be realistic

2. How we do it > Broad Overview of the field •What other companies are doing this? Look at whole field. •How long has the idea been around? What is new? •What are its prospects, really? (Eg: portable fuel cells, biometrics, videoconferencing)

2. How we do it > Broad Cross-industry comparisons •Can help to identify trends or potential pitfalls (Eg: Dotcoms and clean-tech; airlines and telecoms; cars and phones; social networks and early ISPs)

2. How we do it > Broad International comparisons •What happened in other countries? Policies? Social factors? •“Evidence from X suggests…” (Eg: telecoms deregulation, broadband in South Korea, 3G in Japan)

2. How we do it > Broad Historical comparisons •Analogies can help to explain or predict (Eg: telegraph and internet: World peace? Hype? Hackers?)

2. How we do it > Deep Deeper coverage: more technical detail, not hand-waving Our readers have an appetite for an extra level of detail Detail can be added without using more complex language

2. How we do it > Deep The problem with this design was that during recharging, the metallic lithium reformed unevenly at the negative electrode, creating spiky structures called “dendrites” that are unstable and reactive, and can pierce the separator and cause an explosion. So today's rechargeable lithium-ion batteries do not contain lithium in metallic form. Instead they use materials with lattice structures for both positive and negative electrodes. As the battery discharges, the lithium ions swim from the negative-electrode lattice to the positive one; during recharging, they swim back again. This to-and-fro approach is called a “rocking chair” design.

2. How we do it > Deep Analogies can help The trick is to simplify in a way that helps novices yet does not offend experts in the field We often ask experts for help when choosing an analogy

2. How we do it > Deep Roberto Padovani, Qualcomm’s chief technology officer, explains the difference between these approaches by analogy with a dinner-party conversation. FDMA is akin to a party at which everybody talks simultaneously, but each pair of speakers converses at a different musical pitch, from booming bass to piping treble. A rota system in which party-goers took turns to speak would be like TDMA. And everybody talking at once, only in different languages (so that other conversations are rendered incomprehensible), would be equivalent to the spread-spectrum approach, by now dubbed CDMA.

2. How we do it > Deep We “boffinise” technical stories to check that they are accurate Virtuous circle: more accuracy means better access And we can always ignore boffins’ comments if we choose

2. How we do it > Filter One of the most important things we do is ignore stories, and act as a filter Be sceptical, but not cynical Miracle-cure stories look good, but undermine credibility

2. How we do it > Filter PR firms are very active in IT in particular; more filtering needed Is their client the best example, or just the most accessible? Good PRs will admit that their clients’ rivals exist

2. How we do it > Filter We only run six tech stories a week, plus TQ every quarter “Vital, not urgent” When we ask readers if they want TQ to be longer, they say no. They rely on us to filter

3. The future: Where tech journalism is going

3. Where tech journalism is going In the 1840s The Economist incorporated the Railway Monitor Nothing lasts forever!

3. Where tech journalism is going In 2006 readers started to ask for more coverage of alternative energy -- not the internet This is clearly the next big thing Climate change is a tech story -- the biggest in history

3. Where tech journalism is going One point of view: peak in 2013 (“The next bubble: Priming the markets for tomorrow's big crash”. By Eric Janszen. Harper’s Magazine, February 2008)

3. Where tech journalism is going Computing/telecoms is no longer the only definition of “the tech industry” So start learning about batteries, fuel cells, solar panels, ethanol, wind, wave, nuclear, etc

3. Where tech journalism is going History (dotcom bubble) suggests broad adoption will occur after bubble bursts The fight against climate change will involve lots of technology that will need to be explained. No silver bullet; a portfolio

3. Where tech journalism is going Debates raging around: •Cap and trade v carbon tax •Biofuels v food •Clean-tech subsidies •GM crops •Geoengineering Plenty of explaining to do

3. Where tech journalism is going Biotechnology will probably be part of the solution: •GM crops •Fuel from artificial life-forms And biotechnology is heating up anyway. So learn about that, too

3. Where tech journalism is going The good news for tech journalists who know about computers: Alternative energy and biotech depend on a foundation of IT (smart grids, DNA analysis) -- so you have a head start

3. Where tech journalism is going I am an optimist If we do our jobs right, we can help to fix the problem I am looking forward to the future -- see you there!

Why technology journalism matters Tom Standage, The Economist January 17th 2009

http://basheer.me	43
http://www.slideshare.net	7
http://www.mbaatalk.com	5
http://www.basheer.me	2

Tom Standage - why Technology journalism matters?

by Muhammad Basheer on Feb 11, 2009

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

4 Embeds 57

Statistics

Tom Standage - why Technology journalism matters? — Presentation Transcript