Although the New York Times doesn’t devote much ink to the subject of nanotechnology, when they do they manage to cover it they put a pretty positive spin on the subject no matter how dire the circumstance. You might call it “putting a bow on it.”
In this example from the end of 2007 in which the Grey Lady seems to acknowledge that there is an uneasy feeling that we’ve somehow have been cheated by all the hype from about 2000 on, we get a promise that was all going to change real soon when all these start-up companies go public.
Of course, nanotechnology companies going public in the years 2008 and thus far in 2009 has been few and far between. Honestly, I don’t know of one, but if someone knows of any please let me know.
Unfazed by their rosy appraisal of nanotechnology 18 months ago failing to materialize, the NY Times have put their happy face on nanotech once again.
Of course, the paper of record again presents us with the difficult context from which nanotechnology is going to save the world. But nanotech is no longer suffering from unsupported hype, but this time the challenging obstacle is government budget cuts that promise to decimate nanotechnology epicenters like California.The savior this time comes in the form of university and industry collaborative development agreements. The evolution from IPOs being the rescuer of nanotechnology back to basic university/industry partnerships seems more a regression than a progression. But considering the current state of the market, finding any silver lining to the storm clouds now circling nanotechnology seems welcomed.
Dexter Johnson is a contributing editor at IEEE Spectrum, with a focus on nanotechnology.
