Technology | The Digital Futurist

Techno-Evangelism in the Newsroom Revisited, 2025

[This post was written with the help of AI (ChatGPT) under the direction of Howard Finberg, using original materials from the 1993 SND workshop.]

In October 1993, Howard Finberg, then a senior executive at Phoenix Newspapers, presented a bold and forward-thinking call to action at the Society for News Design (SND) workshop in Dallas. His message? Technology alone doesn’t transform journalism—leadership does.

In a trio of materials—his presentation slides, a one-page manifesto, and an adapted quiz on “techno-types”—Finberg introduced the concept of techno-evangelism. This philosophy positioned newsroom managers not just as adopters of tools, but as cultural guides capable of leading staff through the disruptions of digital transformation.

“Technology is not hardware or even software,” Finberg emphasized. “It’s about workflow—how people work, how information moves, and how decisions are made.”

A Culture Shift, Not Just a Technical One

Finberg’s insights in these documents reflect a growing realization in the early 1990s that digital change was not just about adding computers—it required restructuring editorial thinking and habits. Drawing a distinction between evolutionary changes like hot type to cold type and revolutionary changes like digital publishing, Finberg argued that this moment required newsroom leaders to step into the unknown.

“Techno-evangelism means finding a leader who will take risks, become a teacher, shoulder responsibilities, and be willing to go wandering in the ‘desert.’”

That metaphor—a lonely figure advocating change in a skeptical environment—was not accidental. Many newsroom leaders at the time were still uneasy with even basic digital tools. To address this, Finberg included a humorous quiz that helped participants identify if they were Techno-Phobes, Techno-Boomers, or Techno-Wizards. His approach was thoughtful but practical, focused not on hype, but on education and empathy.

Connections to Other Work

This presentation links conceptually with Finberg’s earlier and later work:

Across these efforts, a consistent message emerges: people, not platforms, determine whether technology succeeds or fails in journalism.

AI Conclusion 2025
As we revisit this pivotal moment through the lens of the Digital Futurist archive, it’s clear that Finberg’s guidance still resonates in today’s AI-infused media world. The same challenges he identified—skepticism, organizational inertia, and the need for cultural leadership—are present again as AI tools enter the newsroom. Institutions like The Associated Press have emphasized editorial oversight and human accountability when deploying AI, echoing Finberg’s focus on workflow and responsibility. The New York Times and other major media organizations have released AI principles that stress the central role of editorial judgment. Meanwhile, journalism philanthropy groups such as the Craig Newmark Foundation have emphasized training, transparency, and newsroom culture as essential to successfully integrating new technologies. Finberg’s vision—of leaders willing to explore, teach, and humanize technological change—continues to offer a roadmap that is as relevant today as it was in 1993.

Technology Shifting, a View from 1999

In February 1999, I presented a forward-looking view of how technology could reshape the media industry. Speaking at the Interactive Newspapers Conference in Atlanta, I emphasized strategic use of technology, organizational culture, and evolving audience behaviors over hype or novelty. More than two decades later, many of my insights still resonate. This was the second of two speech I gave at the conference. [The first can be found here.]

Here’s a summary of the technology speech transcript, created by AI

Content Strategy: “Author Once, Publish Many”

Finberg introduced a philosophy that still guides media workflows today: create content once and distribute it across multiple platforms. At Central Newspapers (CNI), this approach was powered by a database-driven system that fed content to print, web, fax, and even early mobile devices. The goal was efficiency and flexibility in an increasingly fragmented media landscape.

This strategy formed the foundation for today’s multi-platform publishing models, where newsrooms serve content to websites, apps, newsletters, and social media from a central source.

Technology as a Cultural Change Agent

Finberg argued that technology alone doesn’t transform organizations—culture does. For CNI, success meant not only installing systems, but also ensuring physical and digital infrastructure enabled collaboration. He pointed out how simple disconnects, like incompatible email systems, often held back real innovation.

His approach highlights a lasting truth: real transformation requires internal alignment and thoughtful change management.

Building Engagement with “Sticky” Applications

Rather than simply counting clicks, CNI aimed to boost engagement through what Finberg called “sticky apps”—features that encouraged users to return. Examples included personalized job agents, deep local sports coverage, and cobranding partnerships with other news outlets.

The idea was to deliver lasting value to users, moving beyond raw traffic to deeper loyalty and longer visits—metrics that are now standard in digital newsrooms.

Classifieds in Decline, Innovation in Response

Finberg was frank about the threat facing newspaper classifieds: “We operate on the principle that Classifieds is going away.” In response, CNI developed alternative digital products such as Work Avenue, Virtual Job Fairs, and HomeFair.com—each built around services and user experience rather than traditional advertising.

This proactive shift toward diversified, digital-first revenue streams foreshadowed the industry’s broader pivot in the 2000s.

Local Strength Through Strategic Partnerships

Finberg also emphasized the power of collaboration. He highlighted niche content sites, like “Indiana’s Game” for basketball fans, that partnered with other local papers for shared content and branding. Likewise, Arizona Central’s joint tourism site with the state showed how media organizations could pool resources to better serve users.

These partnerships created richer experiences and extended reach—long before “content syndication” became a digital norm.

Search as a Guided Experience

In a beta project with WaveShift, Finberg previewed a curated search engine that prioritized relevant, editor-approved results. The tool allowed users to explore external content without leaving the publisher’s site—supporting both user satisfaction and retention.

This approach reflected an early understanding of user-centered design and editorial curation, still central to quality digital journalism today.

A Forward-Facing Mindset

Finberg concluded his talk with a mix of humor and urgency. His key message: success depends on delivering real value to users while staying agile in the face of disruption. Technology should serve strategy—not the other way around.

Even now, as media organizations continue to evolve, his 1999 roadmap remains a reminder that the fundamentals—audience, content, culture—still matter most.

Impact of Technology on Newsrooms, 1993

In a forward-looking presentation at the Seybold Conference in San Francisco in 1993, I explore the transformational impact of digital technology on the newsroom. Speaking in 1993, at the dawn of the digital revolution, I emphasize that technological change isn’t just about adopting new tools—it’s about fundamentally rethinking how journalism is practiced, how newsrooms are structured, and how people work together. The shift to digital, I argue, is not just evolutionary but revolutionary.

Key Points

Circular Workflows: Traditional linear production is giving way to a more collaborative, integrated process where editing, design, and content development happen in tandem.

Hybrid Roles – The “One Journalist”: Roles are blending. Journalists increasingly need to be multi-skilled—handling editing, layout, design, and even multimedia (audio, video, fax).

Organizational Shifts: Old org charts no longer reflect reality. The focus is moving toward fluid, cross-functional teams rather than rigid editorial silos.

Technology = Fewer Machines, Bigger Changes: While digital tools reduce hardware needs and cut costs, they also force reevaluation of workflows and staffing.

Tech is About People: Choosing the right tools starts with understanding how people work and how tasks flow. The goal is to enable, not restrict.

Leadership Through Learning: Managers must lead by example—learning new tools themselves, supporting their teams, and helping leadership embrace change.

Evolution vs. Revolution: Recognizing the difference is key. Shifts like hot type to cold type are evolutionary. The move to digital production is revolutionary—and demands a new mindset.

The file is a PDF of the presentation slides.

A View of News from the 1940s

In cleaning our storage unit, I came across a series of books titled “Building America” that belong to Kate Finberg’s family in Michigan. They were published in the late 1930s and early 1940s by the National Education Association (NEA), through its Department of Supervision and Curriculum Development. One of the books was about “news.” The section is an interesting history lesson as how the public viewed the press and provided a look at the technology used to create and distribute information at that time.

From the booklet:

This study unit of Building America takes up important questions dealing with news:

How did Americans get news in the past?
How do modern papers gather and distribute news?
Are modern newspapers too sensational?
Does America have “freedom of the press”?
How can we make sure that newspapers, the radio, and newsreels give us important and truthful news?

The books are really bound copies of pamphlets that probably were distributed to schools and other locations. The next “chapter” of this volume is about “Farmers”.

Here’s what Chat GPT wrote:

“The Building America series reflects the NEA’s emphasis on civic education, democracy, and national identity.”

“The Building America series was more than just a history book—it was a carefully designed educational resource aimed at shaping young Americans’ understanding of their country’s past and future. By publishing this series, the NEA sought to:
✔ Provide a structured, standardized history curriculum.
✔ Reinforce democratic and civic ideals, especially in a time of global conflict.
✔ Highlight key industries

I also asked Chat GPT whether this series is propaganda. Here’s its response:

While the Building America series may not have been pure propaganda, it likely contained ideological framing that emphasized American exceptionalism, democracy, and civic duty—especially in the context of WWII. It served both an educational and nation-building function, shaping how young Americans understood their country.

Review of Local Websites, 1999

In 1999, the PAFET group did an important information sharing project. Each group reported on their web site strategy and methods used to execute that strategy, marketing implementations, measurement of success, content mix and traffic. Among the newspaper sites that reported was:

The Arizona Republic, AZ
Dallas Morning News, TX
Providence Journal, RI
St. Louis Post-Dispatch, MO
News & Observer, NC
The Press Enterprise, CA
Sacramento Bee, CA
Star News, IN
Star Tribune, MN
Town Talk, LA

There is also a table that compares all of the website traffic among PAFET members.

Electronic Newspaper of the Future, 1992

One of the more innovative folks in the design universe was a professor from Spain, Dr. Juan A. Giner. Giner was at the School of Journalism at the University of Navarra. In 1992, he asked several folks for their thoughts about electronic newspapers. This is before the Internet. I think he was using some of the information for a research paper and for a presentation at the Summit Meeting of Editors and Publishers, a European conference, I’m guessing.

Here’s what I wrote, the conclusion of my thoughts, sent via FAX:

They have information to sell, regardless of the form it takes to reach the reader. Unfortunately, only a few see the road ahead; too many are looking behind at the road they have just traveled.

If the current leadership fails in understanding the market place or fails to adjust to the needs of the news consumer, then the consequences will be two-fold:

• Many more companies will go out of business.
• Many more companies will be bought by those who understand the needs of the marketplace and replace those publishers and editors who do not.

The future will belong to the quick and smart. Be neither quick nor smart and you’ll be out of the game.

It was fun to think about the future.

Looking to the Future: 1986 to 2001

In the past, journalism conventions serving management and editors, such as the Associated Press Managing Editors conference, were major events. Hundreds of participants, dozens of panels and speeches. So important that the APME published what the called the “Red Book.” This was a record of the proceedings so those who could not attend would learn what was discussed.

In 1987, the Red Book reported on a panel held in Cincinnati, OH, on “Newspapers After 2001.” The panel was tasked to look ahead 15 years. Among the participants:

James K. Batten, president, Knight-Ridder, Inc.
Louis D. Boccardi, president and general manager, The Associated Press
John J. Curley, president and chief executive officer. Gannett Newspapers
Katherine W. Fanning, editor, Christian Science Monitor
Jeff Greenfield, media critic and columnist, ABC
James Hoge, president, New York Daily News
C.K. McClatchy, president, McClatchy Newspapers
Burl Osborne, president, Dallas Morning News
Eugene C. Patterson, chairman and chief executive officer, Times Publishing Company, St. Petersburg, Fla.
William O. Taylor, chairman and chief executive officer. Boston Globe
Chris Urban, Urban and Associates

Reading over this edited transcript of the discussion, I was struck how little the panel got right. In fact, I think most of them missed the speeding “technology bus” that was about to crash into their newsprint based business and scatter their profits and employees to the wind. There was discussion about the declining readership — one panelist suggest the industry encourage literacy — and the fragmented advertising market. There were a couple of notable mentions of technology. Here’s one from Kay Fanning:

We’re being increasingly bombarded by trivia and through the progress of technology it will get worse and worse. With all the world coming to our back door in terms of satellite communications and transportation, the link-up of the global stock market, all aspects of computer networking, newspapers will need a content that offers the citizen a pathway through this hail of trivia. That content will require more substance, more quality, offer more understanding rather than just a lot of information. I believe in the simple bromide of the better mousetrap. If we have a quality that is relevant to the citizens and to the public interest we can easily raise the numbers from 40 to 60 percent.

I did like the comments from John Curley about improving the visuals of newspapers to make them more appealing:

Presentation is part of it too. Color, graphics, and our ability to do more in that area will be important. I don’t mean to pick on the Cincinnati Inquirer, since we own it, but in yesterday’s paper we went 11 pages in the Life Section without a graphic or photo. and a lot of the contents suggested that there could have been some there. I don’t think that is atypical of most newspapers, and it’s a weakness in a lot of our newspapers too.

Curley was the first editor of USA Today, hence he knew about color and graphics. USA Today was launched four years earlier, in 1982. in 1988, the American Press Institute had a major design seminar looking at the future of newspapers. It was called Design 2000. Details are elsewhere on this site. Lots of graphics and color in those prototype newspapers.

TV News’ Future

Also at the convention was Lawrence Grossman, president of NBC News. He gave a talk on “Television News After 2001.” He was sort right when he said:

My thesis is that if you look 15 years ahead to the year 2001, it will be much like what we see now in television news, just as when you look back to 1970, television news was basically like what you’re seeing now.

But take that out a few more years and he was very, very wrong. He got a few things right. It was an interesting read.

Electronic Photo Workshop, 1990

Back in the late 1980s and early 1990s, digital photography equipment was rare [and expensive]. I’m not just talking about cameras, but also all the equipment needed to process those digital files into a format that could be used in daily newspaper production. Learning to use these digital photographic tools was the goals the National Press Photographers Association‘s Electronic Photo Workshop.

In November 1990, the EPW was in Tempe, AZ and I served as “Executive Editor.” The real work, however, done by the workshop co-chairs: John Cornell, Newsday, and Bill Hodge, Long Beach Press Telegram. There were more than 90 participants [see page two of the PDF] and more than two dozen vendors, including Adobe and Apple.

The published work from the conference was a 32-page tabloid that has photos and stories about life in Arizona. Each story used different combinations of equipment.

I liked what I wrote for the introduction to the publication:

This newspaper is living classroom experiment. Our purpose is not to highlight one program, camera, or other piece of hardware against its competition.

To the contrary, we wanted to bring together the technological marvels of our time with the trained eye of journalists using cameras. Only by exploring technology will we learn how best to use the computer software and hardware that have greatly influenced our newsrooms.

Readers need to !mow of the almost superhuman efforts undertaken by both vendors and participants to publish this newspaper, and the great sense of pride in attempting to capture images that communicate information.. Despite the lure of the hardware and software, the primary purpose of the pages produced here was to communicate.

…

Content was our overall goal. Content married with technology.

There are some other articles that are worth a historical read.

Michael Bloomberg on Newspapers

Michael Bloomberg, president and founder of Bloomberg Financial Markets gave a keynote speech at the International Winter Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas in 1997. His speech was about the future of electronic devices and he spent a lot of time talking about newspapers and whether there’s an electronic solution that would make consumers give up on print. [That’s why I’m posting his speech]. An excerpt:

And if we are going to build consumer products, if our businesses are going to grow and let electronic devices replace newspapers they are going to have to provide the same functionality. Now another answer to the problem would be don’t let radio and television become the substitute for newspapers. But find some way to make newspapers more valuable, more economic. And if you think about it, it is a very easy thing to do. Right now we go and we chop down an awful lot of trees in Canada, we haul them to the mill, we grind them up into paper, we put ink on it, we deliver it to the comer newspaper stand or the newspaper boy or girl throws it on your doorstep. You read it once and you throw it away. It is a phenomenally inefficient thing screaming for a technological solution.

Bloomberg also so the coming of streaming television:

No matter how many times people tell you that broadcast is here to stay, the feet of the matter is it is not here to stay. It is so compelling to be able to get what you want, when you want it, independent of everybody else that we are going to give you video on demand no matter what it costs and no matter who’s axe gets gored and people will try to protect their industries. They will try to protect their jobs, but the feet of the matter is, if you look at the public, the public has the interest in getting a movie they go to Blockbuster, they want to see it when they want to see it. The public even goes to the comer movie theater to see it when they want to see it. The public wants to be able to jump over commercials, which is going to be a very big problem. Who is going to pay for all of this? The public wants to be able to stop that football game for two minutes when the phone rings or when the diaper needs changing. And we are going to have to deliver those kinds of products, those facilities, those attributes for television.

His speech had some good visionary moments.

The Future: Embracing Change

In 1999, the Society for News Design published a handbook for editors about dealing with pagination and technology. I was asked to write a chapter about “the future” and embracing the changes new technology would bring.

Some of the things I got right:

Working at home, even doing newspaper design
Always connected to a network
Using databases to edit and present content
Constant feedback on what consumers are reading

Here’s the opening to the chapter:

Firing up her monitor with a verbal “log on” command, Kate gets ready for the daily meeting with her fellow editors and a managing editor at The Republic.

Almost instantly, her monitor is on the “virtual network” and eight images of her co-workers start to appear. Three are at home; two are at remote or shared offices. One is on the road with his team covering a live event. The rest are at the paper’s headquarters building.

After discussing reports from the teams that worked the previous “info cycles” – each cycle is four hours and there are teams working around the clock – Kate and her fellow editors start the business of producing material for The Republic.

She doesn’t have a computer in her house, only a 27-inch flat-screen that is about one inch thick and connected to The Network. Everything is on The Network: broadcast entertainment signals, written communications and voice messages.

It was a fun assignment. Thank you, Olivia Casey.

“Technology” Items