Tech TV

Technology ... the word is enough to drive a stake through many a brave editor's heart. Having been weaned on a steady diet of crime, political snarking and the odd natural disaster, most editors are clueless when it comes to tech ... though it must be said that my experience with the ed-in-c at birla paper leaves me with some hope.

what it boils down to is this. for most people, being clueless about technology is a proud badge, worn on the sleeve, and referred to atleast ten times during any discussion of a tech story.

the irony lies in the fact that our entire civilisation (if you can call it that) is based on technology. where would we be without the internal combusion engine, satellites, optics, digital recording, computers, and picture tubes?

let me answer my own question: without a job.

to ignore technology is one thing. to accept it without too much thought is okay. but to make a fetish out of being ignorant about it is a bloody crime.

which brings us to tech reporters and their bosses.

for most people technology is about the latest gadget. "tell me what happens when you press a button." something that makes for a great anchor or the last story in a primetime rundown.

to the best of my knowledge, the people over at wired were the first publication to figure out what tech writing was all about. them and tim o'reilly -- the man behind o'reilly publishing -- anybody who's ever learnt a programming language has picked up an o'reilly book at some point of time or the other.

what's great about wired is that it has always tried to figure out how tech affects the world ... so it isn't only about the latest gadget, but about the guy using the latest gadget!

same difference?