Technology Review

File:Technology-review cover january2007.gif Technology Review, cover dated January 2007
Editor in Chief	Jason Pontin[1]
Categories	Science magazine
Bimonthly magazine/daily web site
Publisher	Jason Pontin
Total circulation (2011)	161,529[2]
First issue	1899
Company	Technology Review Inc.[3] (owned by MIT)
Country	United States
Based in	Cambridge, Massachusetts
Language	English
Website	technologyreview.com
ISSN	0040-1692

Technology Review is a magazine published by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.^[4] It was founded in 1899 as "The Technology Review", and was re-launched without the "The" in its name on April 23, 1998 under then publisher R. Bruce Journey. In September 2005, it underwent another transition under the current editor-in-chief and publisher, Jason Pontin, to a form resembling the historical magazine.

Before the 1998 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 historical magazine had been published by the MIT Alumni Association, was more closely aligned with the interests of MIT alumni, and had a more intellectual tone and much smaller public circulation. The magazine, billed from 1998 to 2005 as "MIT's Magazine of Innovation," and from 2005 onwards as simply "published by MIT", focused on new technology and how it is commercialized; was mass-marketed to the public; and was targeted at senior executives, researchers, financiers, and policymakers, as well as MIT alumni.^[5]

In 2011, Technology Review received an Utne Reader Independent Press Award for Best Science/Technology Coverage.^[6]

History[link]

Original magazine: 1899–1998[link]

Technology Review was founded in 1899 under the name "The Technology Review" and relaunched in 1998 without the "The" in its original name. It currently claims to be "the oldest technology magazine in the world."^[7]

In 1899 The New York Times commented:^[8]

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 [sic] among its countless friends the most perfect co-operation."

The career path of James Rhyne Killian illustrates the close 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 Wiener, then Assistant Professor of Mathematics, describing some deficiencies in a paper Albert Einstein had published earlier that year. Wiener 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 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,^[9] 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 [sic] 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.^[10]

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.".^[11] 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.^[12]

Contributors to the magazine also included Thomas A. Edison, Winston Churchill, and Tim Berners-Lee.^[13]

Relaunch: 1998–2005[link]

A radical transition of the magazine occurred in 1996. At that time, according to the Boston Business Journal,^[14] 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 in the magazine's history. 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."^[15] John Benditt replaced Steven J. Marcus as editor-in-chief, the entire editorial staff was fired, and the modern Technology Review was born.

Boston Globe columnist David Warsh^[16] 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."

Under Bruce Journey, Technology Review billed 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.^[17]

Intending 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.

Since Journey, Technology Review has been distributed as a regular mass-market magazine and appears on newsstands. By 2003, circulation had more than tripled from 92,000 to 315,000,^[18] about half that of Scientific American, and included 220,000 paid subscribers and 95,000 sent free to MIT alumni. Additionally, in August 2003, a German edition of Technology Review was started in cooperation with the publishing house Heinz Heise (circulation of about 50,000 as of 2005). According to The New York Times,^[19] as of 2004 the magazine was still "partly financed by M.I.T. (though it is expected to turn a profit eventually)."

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 magazine is published by Technology Review, Inc, an independent media company owned by MIT. 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." In 1999 the Boston Globe noted that (apart from the alumni section) "few Technology Review articles actually concern events or research at MIT."^[20] However, in the words of editor Jason Pontin:

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.^[21]

From 1997 to 2005, R. Bruce Journey held the title of "publisher"; Journey was 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.^[22] In 2006, Technology Review was named a finalist in the "general excellence" category of the annual National Magazine Awards, sponsored by the American Society of Magazine Editors.^[23]

On June 6, 2001, Fortune and CNET Networks launched a publication entitled FORTUNE/CNET Technology Review.^[24] MIT sued^[25] FORTUNE's parent corporation, Time, Inc. for infringement of the Technology Review trademark.^[26] The case was quickly settled. In August the MIT student newspaper reported that 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.^[27]

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 International Atomic Energy Agency'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." ^[28] The stories were retracted.

Modern magazine: 2005-present[link]

On August 30, 2005, Technology Review announced that R. Bruce Journey, publisher from 1996 to 2005, would be replaced by the current Editor in Chief, Jason Pontin, and would reduce the print publication frequency from eleven to six issues per year while enhancing the publication's website.^[28] The Boston Globe characterized the change as a "strategic overhaul." Editor and publisher Jason Pontin stated that he would "focus the print magazine on what print does best: present[ing] longer-format, investigative stories and colorful imagery." Technology Review's Web site, Pontin said, would henceforth publish original, daily news and analysis (whereas before it had merely republished the print magazine's stories). Finally, Pontin said that Technology Review's stories in print and online would identify and analyze emerging technologies.^[29] This focus resembles that of the historical Technology Review.

[edit] TR35

Technology Review has become well-known for its annual TR35 list of the top 35 innovators in the world under the age of 35. In 1999, and then in 2002–2004, TR produced the TR100, a list of "100 remarkable innovators under the age of 35." In 2005, this list was renamed the TR35 and shortened to 35 individuals under the age of 35. Notable recipients of the award include Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin, PayPal co-founder Max Levchin, Geekcorps creator Ethan Zuckerman, Linux developer Linus Torvalds, BitTorrent developer Bram Cohen, MacArthur "genius" bioengineer Jim Collins, investor Micah Siegel and Netscape co-founder Marc Andreessen.^[30][31]

References[link]

External links[link]

• Technology Review homepage
• Technology Review Italy
• Technology Review Spain
• Technology Review Germany
• Technology Review China
• Technology Review India
• Technology news, reviews and new software releases
• Technology News And Review

Man vs. Wild,^[1] also called Born Survivor: Bear Grylls,^[2] Ultimate Survival,^[3][4] or Survival Game,^[5] was a survival television series hosted by Bear Grylls on the Discovery Channel. In the United Kingdom, the series was originally shown on Channel 4, but later series were broadcast on Discovery Channel UK. The series was produced by British television production company Diverse Bristol. The show was first broadcast on November 10, 2006 after airing a pilot episode titled "The Rockies" on March 10, 2006. In a special first aired on June 2, 2009, Will Ferrell joined Grylls on a survival trip to Northern Sweden.^[6] Grylls also said he has been approached about doing a Man vs. Wild urban disaster 3-D feature film, an idea he said he would "really like to do."^[7] Ben Stiller has also signed on for an episode later in the year.^[8] Grylls signed on to showcase urban survival techniques in a new Discovery show called Worst-Case Scenario, which premiered on May 5, 2010 on the network.^[9] In March 2012, Discovery Channel terminated its contract with Grylls due to contract disputes.^[10]

Background[link]

The general format of each episode is the premise that Grylls is left stranded in a region. The episode documents his efforts to survive and find a way back to civilization, usually requiring an overnight shelter of some kind. Mostly there are wild terrains – jungles, forests or similar non-urban areas. But for e.g. in special episodes, like that in Shipyard Gdynia^[11] there are industry areas located in cities. Grylls also tells about successful and failed survivals in the particular area which he is in.

Each episode takes about one week to ten days to shoot. Before each show the crew does about a week of reconnaissance, followed by Grylls doing a flyover of the terrain. Grylls then undergoes two days of intensive survival briefings. "I spend two days on location prior to dropping in – I go through all the safety and comms briefing as well as being briefed on local conditions, and flora and fauna by local rangers and a local bushcraft expert." He is followed on the program by a cameraman and a sound engineer.^[12] Directors oversee location filming and the final edit of each program. Season One directors included Dominic Stobart, Scott Tankard and Mark Westcott. Grylls said, "I suppose to bear in mind that this is a worst-case scenario show, and therefore, of course things have to be planned. Otherwise, it would just be me in the wild and nothing happening, you know, 'cause textbook survival says you land, you get yourself comfortable, you wait for rescue, you don't do anything. It would be a very boring show. The show is how to deal if you fall into quick sand, if you get attacked by an alligator, if you have to make a raft. I get a really good briefing before we go. I know there's a big river there, there's gonna be a great cliff climb there, there's loads of snakes in those rocks, watch out for an alligator. So I do have a good idea of 80 percent of what's gonna happen." Furthermore, contrary to onscreen presentation, his movements are rarely from Point A to Point B: "We plan it, if we're doing different locations, sometimes we'll have to do a whole crew move and get a helicopter. Again, we're talking huge distances sometimes. So we'll use helis when we have to. They'll go out three weeks ahead of me, and go, "That bit's no good. Those rapids we thought are gonna be good are boring, but down there, it's great. He completes the journey alone without any human resource or help."^[13] In April 2008, Grylls and Discovery released a book that includes survival tips from the TV show. In June 2009, Grylls had a special co-host, actor Will Ferrell in episode 41. This season 5 premiere episode was called Men vs. Wild.^[6]

In July 2011, Grylls had a special co-host, actor Jake Gyllenhaal in the season 7 premiere of the show on the Discovery Channel; they travelled through Iceland.

In March 2012, Discovery Channel terminated its contract with Grylls due to contract disputes.^[14]

Episodes[link]

Regional variations[link]

The show is called Man vs Wild in the USA, Canada, India, New Zealand and Australia. The show does, however, go by different names in other parts of the world. In the United Kingdom, where the show originates, it is called Born Survivor: Bear Grylls and is broadcast on the Discovery Channel.^[15] It is also known as Ultimate Survival in other countries. Grylls' books have also been published under the Born Survivor name in the UK.^[16] These variations run basically the same format as Man vs Wild however there are some differences between them. The opening animation/narrative is also different as Grylls introduces the show with "Hello and welcome to Born Survivor, I'm Bear Grylls and I'm in England where I'm going to show you what it takes to get out alive". There are also a few differences in what he does during the shows however the names of the episodes are generally the same. The release date or new episodes also varies slightly as they cannot normally be arranged to show at exactly the same time due to schedules and time differences.

Criticism and response[link]

Criticism[link]

In 2006, a New Survivor crew member admitted that some scenes in episodes were misleading, indicating to viewers that Grylls was stranded in the wild alone when he was not.^[17] The issue of scenes being manipulated was also raised by Mark Weinert, a U.S. survival consultant. One example he gave was of a raft allegedly being put together by team members before being taken apart so Grylls could be filmed building it. Other scenes that have been criticised include:

• Grylls was shown trying to lasso "wild" mustang in the Sierra Nevada that were in fact tame and had been hired from a trekking station nearby.^[18]
• A scene filmed for another show in which a crew member wore a bear suit to simulate a bear attack due to inability finding a tame bear.^[19]
• A scene where Grylls was purported to have escaped from an active volcano by leaping across lava, avoiding poisonous sulphur dioxide gas, was actually enhanced with special effects, using hot coal and smoke machines.^[20][21]
• Similarly, another episode gave viewers the impression that Grylls "was a 'real life Robinson Crusoe' stuck on a desert island", while in reality he was on an outlying part of the Hawaiian archipelago and retired to a motel at night.^[18][22]

Show's response to criticism with changes[link]

In response to these early criticisms, Discovery and Channel 4 aired re-edited versions of some episodes, removing elements that were too planned, with a fresh voice-over and a preceding announcement pointing out that some situations are "presented to Bear to show the viewer how to survive". However, five of the most controversial Season 1 episodes were never re-released after editing and are no longer available on DVD from Discovery. These are The Rockies, Moab Desert, Costa Rican Rain Forest, Mount Kilauea (Hawaii) and Desert Island (Hawaii).^[23]

Following criticism in the media in July 2007 about elements of the show's first season, British Channel 4 temporarily suspended the show's second season for a few weeks, promising clarification and transparency in the production and editing of the show.^[24] The channel responded to criticism of the show by pointing out that Grylls conducted all of his own stunts, many of which put him in perilous conditions, and that the show was not a documentary, but a "how-to" guide to "basic survival techniques in extreme environments."^[18] The channel issued a statement saying that:

The programme explicitly does not claim that presenter Bear Grylls' experience is one of unaided solo survival. For example, he often directly addresses the production team, including the cameraman, making it clear he is receiving an element of back-up.^[25]

The Discovery Channel also responded to the criticism by announcing that future airings would be edited (including a disclaimer at the beginning of each episode) so as not to imply to viewers that Grylls was left alone to survive during production of the show. Since then, Grylls has stated on camera when he has received assistance in order to demonstrate survival tactics or when he is exiting the setting for a period of time due to safety concerns. Grylls also tells the cameras filming behind the scenes footage how the film crew sometimes assists him in filming certain sequences.^{[26][27][28][29]} The Discovery Channel in the UK has also edited out certain scenes of Grylls killing animals that he has captured for food. The Discovery Channel also released behind the scenes footage showing how sequences of Man Vs. Wild are filmed. In the footage, while setting up a scene, each production crew member is introduced and their role is briefly explained, including a safety consultant who served in the Royal Marines. During the scenes, Grylls tells how each crew members' role ensures his safety while he explains survival tactics. The footage includes open discussion over safety and other precautions.

On August 3, 2007, Grylls posted on his blog that the "press accusations of motels and stagings in the show that have been doing the rounds, all I can say is they don't always tell the full story, but that's life and part of being in the public eye I guess."^[30] In response to allegations of spending nights in local hotels as opposed to staying in the shelters built during filming, Grylls clarifies in an article in the December 3 issue of People magazine that:

Episodes take about ten days to tape, explains Grylls: 'The night stuff [shown on camera] is all done for real. But when I’m not filming I stay with the crew in some sort of base camp.' Episodes now clarify when Grylls gets support from his crew and when situations are staged, 'We should have done that from the start,' he says. 'The more you see, the more real it feels.'^[31]

The new shows and DVDs contain a notice stating that Grylls will receive help from the camera crew on occasion, that he will in certain situations use provided safety equipment to minimize risks, and that he will sometimes deliberately put himself in perilous situations to demonstrate survival techniques. Grylls is specifically credited as "Presenter" to highlight his role in presenting survival techniques to the viewer. In March 2012, Discovery channel terminated relationship with 'Man vs. Wild' star Bear Grylls. “Due to a continuing contractual dispute with Bear Grylls, Discovery has terminated all current productions with him,” a network spokesperson told The Hollywood Reporter. A representative for Grylls confirmed that the Man Vs. Wild star has parted ways with Discovery.^[10]

See also[link]

• Survivorman, a Canadian survival-themed series hosted by Les Stroud.
• Dual Survival
• Man, Woman, Wild

References[link]

External links[link]

• Man vs. Wild Discovery Channel official site
• Man vs. Wild at the Internet Movie Database