Mashable - The Social Media Guide - Latest Comments in The Christian Science Monitor Transitions to New Media

Re: The Christian Science Monitor Transitions to New Media

Bible Study Man — Mon, 20 Apr 2009 01:15:28 -0000

Now with the Seattle Post Intelligencer going online as well, it seems that the trend is like digital photography a few years ago. A gradual trend will make all things digital.

I haven't subscribed to a newspaper since 1992 - about 1 month after we got internet access in the home and at work. However, I've read the news nearly every day.

Re: The Christian Science Monitor Transitions to New Media

Scott Lockhart — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 15:25:48 -0000

This is a good move for the CSM. A weekly magazine can better highlight the long-form news features that they are known for and significantly reduce their headcount and production costs along the way. I would agree that they would have to be one of the more progressive print media companies out there and they will certainly have advantages if they can keep up their editorial quality while maintaining profitability in this hybrid magazine/online format.

Re: The Christian Science Monitor Transitions to New Media

Mark "Rizzn" Hopkins — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 15:04:15 -0000

Not a verb? Check out the first definition:

http://www.google.com/searc...

Re: The Christian Science Monitor Transitions to New Media

Mark "Rizzn" Hopkins — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 15:02:41 -0000

According to detailed reports, it won't be simply going to once a week, but in April they'll be launching a weekly magazine. pretty big difference.

Re: The Christian Science Monitor Transitions to New Media

Bernie Russell — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 06:43:39 -0000

Sorry, but this came across as rather patronizing. The Monitor was one of the first newspapers to move online (1996, I think), and also to offer its online edition as a pdf. I'm sure they know enough to make the right decisions here.
Yes, it is trying to cut costs, but that is motivated by concerns for editorial independence - at the moment, the Christian Science Church is paying half the paper's bills, and no-one is comfortable with that.
They have stuck to their standards in more ways than one. Remember when freelance Jill Carroll was kidnapped in Baghdad? The Monitor worked hard to get her free - and the first thing it did was to put her on the payroll so that she would get staff benefits.
And on the subject of egg-sucking lessons, you have to fix that headline - "transition" isn't a verb. Try "move"; "switch"; "change"; etc.

Re: The Christian Science Monitor Transitions to New Media

dennis — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 05:52:21 -0000

I am wondering about the comparison of monthly visitors to daily print copy? If that should be fair you should add all unique readers of the printed paper for a month together...?

Re: The Christian Science Monitor Transitions to New Media

Shannon — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 00:01:27 -0000

The CS Monitor is going to pay more than a blogging site because they are a hard news organization. Unfortunately, bloggers decided to set their own rates without looking at the already established standards of other heavy writing industries, such as journalism, PR and advertising. The blogging world got it wrong, and they're eventually going to need to raise their standards.