Christian Science Monitor To Drop Daily Print Publication, Go Online Only

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Christian Science Monitor To Drop Daily Print Publication, Go Online Only stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

DENISE LAVOIE | 10/28/08 04:20 PM | AP

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Pedestrians walk by the Christian Science Church in Boston Monday, Oct. 27, 2008. A century after it began publication, The Christian Science Monitor is giving up its daily print edition to focus on posting news online. The international newspaper, started in Boston by the founder of the Christian Science Church, plans to print its final daily editions in April. After that, it will print only a weekend edition. (AP Photo/Elise Amendola)

BOSTON — The Christian Science Monitor said Tuesday it will become the first national newspaper to drop its daily print edition and focus on publishing online, succumbing to the financial pressure squeezing its industry harder than ever.

Come April, the Boston-based general-interest paper _ founded in 1908 and the winner of seven Pulitzer Prizes _ will print only a weekend edition after struggling financially for decades, its editor announced Tuesday.

The Monitor's circulation has fallen from a peak of 223,000 in 1970 to about 50,000 now, while its online traffic has soared. The newspaper gets about 5 million page-views per month, compared with about 4 million five years ago and 1 million a decade ago.

The Monitor was one of the first newspapers in the country to put content online, beginning in 1995, when correspondent David Rohde was taken prisoner in Bosnia.

"Obviously, this is going to help with our costs, but it also enables us to put much more emphasis on the Web and basically put our reporting assets and our editorial assets where we think growth will be in a very tough industry in the future, which we think is the Web," said Editor John Yemma, who was The Boston Globe's multimedia editor before he moved to the Monitor in June.

Cutting print editions also will help the paper reduce its dependence on sizable subsidies from its owner, the First Church of Christ, Scientist, which now provides more than half its operating budget, Yemma said.

Yemma said the move to "Web-first" publishing will likely result in some job cuts, but it is unclear how many.

The Monitor is known for its in-depth international reporting, particularly in the Middle East.

Story continues below
advertisement

In 2006, Jill Carroll, a freelance reporter for the Monitor, was kidnapped in Baghdad and released safely after nearly three months in captivity. Carroll, who was made a staff writer while she was still being held hostage but has since left the newspaper, described her ordeal in an 11-part series published in the Monitor.

Like many other newspapers, it has suffered as more people get their news from the Internet _ which offers newspapers much less revenue even when it brings many more readers.

Andie Tucher, an associate professor at Columbia University's Graduate School Of Journalism, said the Monitor has traditionally been a newspaper people read for in-depth articles after they get local news from a local or state newspaper. With even small newspapers being squeezed by the Web, it makes sense that a "second read" like the Monitor would be harder hit.

"That's the real crisis for papers like this. Rather than reading that as my second or third paper, I now go online and browse Slate and Salon and the political sites, and I can read any other paper I like. It becomes much less urgent to indulge in The Christian Science Monitor," said Tucher, who teaches a course on the history of American journalism.

The paper is not the first but is the most prominent to scale back its print version in favor of online news. In April, The Capital Times, of Madison, Wis., switched to publishing mainly on the Internet. The Daily Telegram, in Superior, Wis., announced in July that it would print only two issues a week and its Web site would become the primary source for daily news. In Ohio, several local papers plan to print their final Monday editions next week.

Rick Edmonds, a media business analyst at the Poynter Institute, said it's tough to draw too many conclusions from the Monitor's decision because it is so unusual: It's owned by the church, has a small but national circulation and sells relatively little advertising.

Still, the industry will be watching, he said.

"I think to the degree they are successful ... that could be important for others looking at that action down the road," he said.

The newspaper was founded in 1908 by Mary Baker Eddy, the founder of the Christian Science Church. Despite its background, it is not considered a religious newspaper, though it continues to publish a daily religious article at Eddy's request.

Ken Doctor, a newspaper analyst for Outsell Inc., a research and consulting company for the information industry, said the Monitor's decision is part of an accelerated shift from print to digital. Over the last several years, many newspapers have reduced their physical size and number of pages to cut newsprint costs, and many have had employee layoffs or buyouts to slash payroll costs.

"We are seeing the amazing shrinkage of the U.S. press," Doctor said.

"What the Monitor is saying to its longtime readers is that the best way we can maintain and preserve the kind of journalism we're doing is to deliver it to you online, even though many of you would prefer it in print. We just can't afford to do it that way anymore."

Citi Investment Research analyst Catriona Fallon wrote Monday that she expects newspapers' revenue from classified, national and retail advertising to continue falling through 2009. And, in the context of initiating coverage of three major newspaper publishers _ Gannett Co., The New York Times Co. and The McClatchy Co. _ she said online revenue is years away from offsetting declines in print.

Yemma said the newspaper has been operating at a loss for years, and has received a subsidy from the church to fund the deficit. In the current fiscal year, the newspaper's operating costs were about $25.7 million, but the church paid about $13.3 million of that.

Over the next five years, the church wants to move to a break-even point where it does not have to subsidize the newspaper anymore, said Yemma. To do that, the newspaper needs to focus on the Web, Yemma said.

"There's no magic bullet on the Web. There's only doing what essentially works ... doing high-quality journalism and doing it continuously so that your site becomes a destination, a place where people can expect newly updated news the way you do it," he said.

The new weekly newspaper will be a 44-page publication that reads like a news magazine, and looks like a hybrid between a newspaper and a magazine, Yemma said.

Dave Aeikens, president of the Society of Professional Journalists, said some readers are sure to feel a sense of nostalgia for the Monitor's daily publication.

"It's really sad to see a great paper such as The Christian Science Monitor stop its print edition," Aeikens said. "It's really unfortunate, but things are evolving."

BOSTON — The Christian Science Monitor said Tuesday it will become the first national newspaper to drop its daily print edition and focus on publishing online, succumbing to the financial pressu...
BOSTON — The Christian Science Monitor said Tuesday it will become the first national newspaper to drop its daily print edition and focus on publishing online, succumbing to the financial pressu...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
26
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 Next › Last » (2 pages total)
photo

Whoah, that's sad. The CS Monitor is one of the smartest papers out there. I admit I'm one of those contributing to this: I rarely buy the paper any more, but I go to the website frequently, especially to read up on foreign affairs. If they have any bias, it's toward the truth.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:18 PM on 10/29/2008
- RHCNYC I'm a Fan of RHCNYC 4 fans permalink

"Christian" and "Science" are two words that have no relationship except in Science exposing Christianity for the farce it is.

Scientists who claim to have 'faith' in myths are not noble. They merely are stubborn, and wish to hold to completely contradictory versions of acquiring knowledge; one based on facts, reason, logic, coherence; and the other based on the arbitrary dismissal of these intellectual tools.

This does not mean that Christian 'Scientists' are bad people.
They are just bad scientists.

If they give validity to 'faith based acquirement of knowledge', then they should acknowledge that it makes their 'scientific' pursuits meaningless.

We're not speaking of holding two equally viable methods of knowledge accumulation at the same time; as if one can like both chocolate and vanilla icecream.
We're speaking of holding dual beliefs that ice cream comes from a verifiable process and verifiable ingredients, and also allowing for the possibility of the Ice Cream Fairy.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:37 AM on 10/29/2008
- jamie461 I'm a Fan of jamie461 21 fans permalink

If you actually understood what Christian Scientists believe, you would realize that your post is nonsensical.

The word "science" in their case is simply not used in the academic sense. To a Christian Scientist, it's simply a belief that their tenets of faith are demonstrable in their daily lives. It is not about challenging worldly science at all. Indeed, Christian Scientists tend to be highly-educated and respectful of scientific pursuits. They are also respectful of the beliefs of others, including non-believers. Christian Scientists are not "creationists" or fundamentalists who believe science and faith are at odds.

Their faith may have a name that seems "odd" to those unfamiliar with it. However, it means something important to them, and all they've ever asked is to be treated with the same tolerance and respect that they show to others.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:10 AM on 10/29/2008
- VOTER I'm a Fan of VOTER 160 fans permalink
photo

Whoa!

Unbiased and soon to be Unprinted.­..........­..........­........
Kudos to the CSM staffers for doing some of the best reporting worldwide and for being
a source of factually honest information. They will be missed and yet not really.

ONLINE IS THE 21st CENTURY NEWS CARRIER............

BEST WISHES!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:16 AM on 10/29/2008
- larry278 I'm a Fan of larry278 45 fans permalink

Regardless of the charges of bias-the CSM is neither right nor left. I'm surprised that no one has yet mentioned that the CSM's articles are concise & fact filled, sans the overt biases of the WSJ, the CSM reminds one of the UK's FT written in American English. Those who object to the CSM's 1 daily article on a Christian Science or Scientists theme have ignored the contents of daily newspapers, including the USA's de facto newspapers of record as determined by SLATE's "Today's Papers". Look at your daily's pages & the articles which have even a peripheral(sp?) theme. You see a bias to a particular religions doctrines & pracrtices; yes, there are such biases. Christian Scientists are more than fervently faithful to Mrs Eddy's teachings & religious thoughts, & are most gentle about introducing Christian Science beliefs & practices in the CSM's 1 daily teaching of Christian Science related material.
Christian Scientists are more than resolute in practicing their faith. They are fully prepared to answer any objection to their faith/beliefs in the face of relentless adversity or criticism. That millitant attitude of affirmation/defense of their faith isn't present in the CSM. They are the epitome of reasonable soft sell in the CSM. One can easily learn to respect & feel affection for their quiet confidence, even when one relies upon organized medicine to live. Disclosure: I've had a progressive chronic disease for 50 years. I rely upon my phsyicians's advice & treatment. I credit that for the quality

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:43 PM on 10/28/2008
- Tulka2 I'm a Fan of Tulka2 229 fans permalink
photo

End of an era. Here is how far we have fallen: In my ancient childhood, one always heard, "Do not believe everything you read". Now it's, "Do not believe everything you hear". I predicted six months ago that in this last week, some would be calling Obama the anti-Christ. Yikes. I wonder if certain elements in the GOP aren't wishing for riots at the polling places as a way to supress the vote...?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:15 PM on 10/28/2008



I have a tremendous respect for Christian Scientists. They are among the very few Christians that walk their talk.

The Monitor is an outstanding source of humanistic news and information.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:43 PM on 10/28/2008
- jamie461 I'm a Fan of jamie461 21 fans permalink

You're very kind to say that. Christian Scientists are accustomed (unfortunately) to dealing with harsh criticism of their faith, though I can honestly say that they do not criticize anyone else's faith, nor try to force it on anyone aggressively. They simply want to practice their faith in peace and harmony with others.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:08 PM on 10/28/2008

Given how bad the paper's distribution has been over the years this is long overdue. I know it's something that has been discussed for many years.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:31 PM on 10/28/2008

I'm a lefty and I think the Monitor is one of the best news sources out there. No matter where you find the news it is up to YOU to check and re-check various sources. The Monitor is on my "favorites" list on my laptop. It will remain there. Those who haven't checked it out , do so, it's not what you may think it is. Al Jazeera is excellent as well.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:05 PM on 10/28/2008
- sammdphd I'm a Fan of sammdphd 3 fans permalink

thats probably because CSM sucks!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:02 PM on 10/28/2008

As a 26 year old guy who prefers reading RSS feeds on whatever device I get my hands on, it's an overdue move getting rid of print. I'm glad to hear it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:02 PM on 10/28/2008
- bruster55 I'm a Fan of bruster55 3 fans permalink

I am a Christian Scientist. I am happy to hear that the Christian Science Monitor is having financial troubles.
I am sure it is because people like me who have refused to buy or read their paper because of the outright right wing bias. The falsehoods that were printed totally destroyed their credibility.
That is why I no longer read or support this paper.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:13 PM on 10/28/2008
photo

I do not believe they are biased and I would be the first to criticize any right-wing bias.

In fact they are maddeningly unbiased.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:43 PM on 10/28/2008
- jamie461 I'm a Fan of jamie461 21 fans permalink

Bruster,

I cannot comprehend that you actually think that. If anything the Monitor gets clobbered from the right all the time for left wing "bias." I suppose if you are getting hammered from both sides of the spectrum, then you must be doing it right.

I have had many friends over the years who worked for the Monitor. Above all, they strive to get the story right and to "injure no man," as is their credo.

This is a sad day, but not unexpected, given the state of newspapers in this country. The Monitor leadership are wise to be looking forward and moving in that direction.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:53 PM on 10/28/2008
- tdpubs I'm a Fan of tdpubs 89 fans permalink
photo

I've felt that the CSM was very fair and even handed. I'm sure like most newspapers, their lot is tied up with the high cost of print and distribution.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:13 PM on 10/28/2008
photo

CSM was the first domestic paper to focus on world news. They would have sold more papers if they left christian science out of the name. Instead of printing a paper nobody reads, they will have a website that nobody visits.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:55 PM on 10/28/2008
- jamie461 I'm a Fan of jamie461 21 fans permalink

Their web site already gets millions of page views a month, and they are still doing very solid, in-depth reporting. The CSM will still have a voice in the media, and the media will be better for it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:50 PM on 10/28/2008
photo

This is unfortunate because the Christian Science Monitor is the most unbiased publication in the country. Bar none.

They are a sleeper of a paper, too. They hardly ever get mentioned, their Monitor Breakfasts go unnoticed.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:52 PM on 10/28/2008
- RenoSage I'm a Fan of RenoSage 21 fans permalink

Founded in 1908, with a reputation of fair reporting, this represents "the end of an era." Sad.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:25 PM on 10/28/2008
Page: 1 2 Next › Last » (2 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect