I recently subscribed to the MIT Technology Review magazine. It promised to be something like Wired but smarter, thanks to its long history and university affiliation.

While it's certainly an improvement over Wired, it doesn't go quite far enough. The April Tech Review is an amorphous stack of short, shallow articles, with only two stories over 4 pages long (there is also a series of one-page articles on technology in various countries, each written by a different author). Most of the content consists of single-page or sub-single-page vignettes, many of which smell like products of the PR machine. I wonder if they'd do better publishing "emerging technology" index cards so VPs can take them into meetings and quote buzzwords until their boss is sufficiently impressed.

Where is the reporting? As close as we get in April's issue is a story by Bryant Urstadt (apparently a freelancer) on oil drilling in the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge. It summarizes the cases for and against drilling, concluding that while the technology to drill cleanly exists, we shouldn't count on the oil industry to use it. This piece is under three pages long. As a short, topical report, it's fine, but I'd expect to see 5-10 of these short reports amid 4-7 serious stories.

Compare this with the New York Times Magazine. NYTM publishes a lot of junk too, but it is also a place for long, deep stories. Every once in a while they'll have a multi-part series that gives you remarkable perspective into e.g. what it's like to be an illegal immigrant or African refugee orphan. Couldn't we do something like this for technology? Rather than publish half-page overviews that amount to saying "Will Wright is working on an even bigger Sim" or "Mena Trott says blogging isn't just for would-be large-audience editorialists", why not do a longer interview? Sit down with Will Wright and have him comment on the state of the games industry. On developing and selling his company. On having the rare power to "propose crazy ideas" and pursue them. I've heard Will Wright speak, and he has plenty to say on all of these topics. It wouldn't even require much editing.

Or, taking the concept of embedded reporting closer to home, why not plant a journalist inside a university lab or corporate research division? Sure, there would be some confidentiality issues to negotiate, but I think many companies would welcome the opportunity to have their most interesting projects profiled in such a prestigious publication. Of course, the reporters would have to be insightfully critical as well, so that it doesn't just turn into an advertisement. Over time, reporters could develop their understanding of an industry segment, and use that to provide real insight about emerging trends.

If I had to boil it down to one request, it would be for longer stories. I'm not expecting a Believer Magazine for geeks, but some progress toward that end would be much appreciated.