In the 1990s, if you wanted to know where publishing technology was headed, you went to Seybold. The Seybold Seminars conferences were the industry’s gathering place for prepress, typesetting and publishing systems — the vendors, the consultants and the newspaper and magazine people who had to make it all work. This session was recorded live at Moscone Center during the San Francisco show, held Sept. 9-13, 1996.
I was introduced by David Cole, the technology consultant, who took some pleasure in my brand-new and rather vague job title.
Howard Finberg is now the Director of Information Technologies, a promotion that he just received last week at the Phoenix Newspapers Inc. Maybe at some point we will be forced to ask him exactly what a director of information technologies is but until then we would like to hear about the new paradox of buying, installing, and using of a publishing system.
My answer was that I’d let everyone know what the job was as soon as I’d read the description. The talk itself was about the pagination project at Phoenix Newspapers Inc. — replacing 15 aging Information International (Triple I) page makeup workstations, the big Raytheon-built terminals the staff called the “green-eyed monster,” and the design rooms kept dark enough for those screens that people called them “bat caves.” We selected CCI Europe, and by the end of August 1996 we were 82-85% complete on the rollout.
But the point I most wanted to make was that pagination was the wrong question.
We asked ourselves this fundamental question and if you have ever talked about this, if you are thinking about this, if this is a question for you…you really have to ask “do you want to paginate?” and I contend quite frankly, honestly, emphatically that the answer is no…not interested in pagination anymore.
What we actually wanted was a publication database — information in the middle, output neutral, feeding print and whatever came next. And that meant breaking the industry’s habit of treating the newsroom as the sole owner of anything valuable.
… we have a model in our industry that says information of value resides within the newsroom. I say let’s break that model, let’s break the paradigm, and say information belongs to whoever needs it and whoever can make use of it.
Much of the speech was about people, not machines: open committees that included the library and purchasing, cookies and free lunches to get staff to vendor demos, a full-time trainer, a Lotus Notes database of threaded project discussions going back to August 1995, and two “super users” from the design department who hated the title. One of them, Eddie Rossi, was quoted as saying the installation was going very well, “but not very elegantly.”
My favorite line in the whole transcript isn’t mine — it’s my boss’s, quoted secondhand: “if you want to know how to reorganize a newspaper, figure out who has control of the furniture, because that is what it is all about.” Nearly 30 years later, I’d still defend that as sound organizational theory.
A note on the transcript: it was typed from the audio recording, so a few things come out oddly. QuarkXPress becomes “cork express,” HTML becomes “HTMO,” and my confession about being a former Macintosh bigot gets rendered as “math bigot.” I’ve left them as they are.
