MIT Technology Review’s New Print Editor Dedicates Issue to ‘Impossible Ideas’

The editor, who described herself as a science and technology journalist with more than 20 years of experience, said she joined MIT Technology Review in spring 2026 to lead the print magazine. In the letter, she wrote that recent issues have brought back regular lists and infographics, two formats she said magazines do particularly well, and that the biggest change is only beginning to take shape. She said Editor in Chief Mat Honan asked her to introduce herself and the current issue.

The issue, intended to close out 2026, includes stories that check in on impossible ideas, including living on the moon and uploading brains, the letter says. It also cites scientists and engineers who refuse to give up on daring efforts such as making synthetic blood or decoding animals’ speech. The editor wrote that the magazine is giving itself permission to play, experiment and be ‘a little … audacious.’

Describing her own approach, the editor wrote that she is a systems thinker who assesses feasibility when an idea arises, running lists, timelines and budget items. She said her career has involved a tug-of-war between ambition and reality, and that she sometimes needs a reminder to stop blocking herself and do the thing. That tension underpins the issue’s focus, she wrote: technology is supposed to apply cutting-edge research and development to make life better, safer, healthier and more joyful.

The letter also says the magazine should examine cases where technology has made things worse, citing forever chemicals, traffic deaths and AI that encourages potentially dangerous user behavior. In those cases, the editor wrote, the task is to assess the damage and find ways to fix what has been broken, even when unraveling the mess might itself seem impossible.

Before joining MIT Technology Review, the editor edited a newsletter about individual actions that can help address the climate crisis, according to the letter. She wrote that some would call that work a fool’s errand given the scale of the problem, and compared such skepticism to doubts about an AI kill switch, practical nuclear fusion or a superconductor that works at room temperature. After three years of that work, she wrote, she learned that focusing on what cannot be done only makes the darkness darker.

The letter closes by dedicating the issue to people who have the audacity to try and who refuse to let anyone, including themselves, tell them no, according to MIT Technology Review.