As opposed to a pastist

The New York Times new lab is hiring a futurist. Laugh if you will. But when you think about it, maybe newspapers should have hired futurists, oh, 10 or two years ago. [See my disclosures]

  • Jeff–I also found a bit of humor in the NYT job posting for a futurist. Having spent 20 years in newspapers, anyone with a clue 10 years ago jumped ship because of a lack of vision.

  • From reading the description of the job, it sounds like they just need an intern to tell them why they are becoming obsolete to those under 30. And by calling them a “futurist” they are saying that they’ll listen to this person?

    Also, off topic, would you please run for president, or at least for Howard Dean’s job? I completely agree with your platform ( in the full disclosures section) but I’ve never really considered myself a Democrat. If only Democrats could be as forthcoming on what they actually believe in, then maybe voters would give them another chance to raise our taxes.

    -Java / Database / Telecom / IT guy

  • I’m definitely a pastist. In fact, so much so, that I will quote the past journalist Ralph Bates, from a book published 44 years ago about a past war, on the past. “I felt then that the sense of the passing of time and of past time was one of the principal sources of poetry.”

    We choose poetry too seldom over news.

    Or whatever.

  • qcontent

    . . . “the future is not what it used to be”. . . nor does anyone know what it will be, anyone. . . Oh New York Times, thank you once again for your insight and judgment in arriving at this sound conclusion.

  • Thanks, I did laugh! I can see his first report: “The future left the station and turned right about 5 years ago.”

    We can look forward to whole sections on youth-oriented silliness now, like articles on hip hop groups in Baghdad on page 1.

  • Mumblix Grumph

    I hope to hell this “futurist” will do better than the standard “flying cars in ten years!” kind of crap we’ve been getting so far.

  • Futurian

    Actually we are called futurians, not futurists.
    Most of what a futurian does is based on the
    work of historians. A futurist does work that is based
    on events that never happened, to develop
    a future that is unique, but ignores the past.
    Erase the past and you have no future.
    Plan the future like there was no past and
    you get something that can’t grow and then try expanding it.
    It will be dead the day after the next day, because there was no yesterday.
    Historians are book writers. Futurians are book makers.

  • The media (including newspapers) did hire them! And they told them things they didn’t want to hear. So they ignored them.

    And to a great degree they are ignoring them still.

  • Well, they had a lot of historians employed there, so they had to continue into the opposite direction as well :)

  • The opposite is actual a dogmatist. But anyway, the article was interesting to the point that it’s not always bad to look to tomorrow to get todays news. LOL!

  • I needed to thanks for this nice read!! I positively having fun with every little little bit of it I have you bookmarked to take a look at new stuff you post