web-first at the christian science monitor: one year later

Check out this Mediabistro Q-and A with John Yemma, the editor of the Christian Science Monitor. He talks about what it means to go web-first, and how digital journalism can make print editions viable:

The Monitor's decision to go online-only last year was seen by many as a major step in the evolution of newspapers. What was the genesis of that decision?
For about two years before they hired me, [the paper] had been involved in a fairly deep-dive [analysis] into the future of print. They looked at their financials, they looked at the future of print, they did prototyping of a weekly in two different forms -- a slick weekly and a tabloid weekly -- and they'd already made a lot of progress along the lines of moving from daily print to weekly print. It seemed like where they weren't making much progress, and where they were still caught in the old paradigm was "What do we do with print? How do we make it most effective?" -- when what we really needed to do was go Web-first. Print should be there, but it shouldn't be the lead dog on the dogsled.

Even though print still makes the bulk of the money?
In fact, that's true of the moment. And it's certainly true with most newspapers. But it's clear that the future is digital. That doesn't mean that you won't have print. It just means that you either lower the frequency of print -- which is what we did -- or you do what the Globe and the Houston Chronicle and others have done, which is to decrease your print footprint... down into your core readership areas, so that your supply chain and distribution chain is much cheaper. And then you raise your subscription rates -- which all of the big companies have done. So that's an attempt to keep print viable.

And:

How has your revenue model worked since the move away from daily print, and how has that affected your workflow generally?
Our revenue streams now are print circulation, print advertising, syndication sales and Web ad revenue. We have a daily subscription email with about 2,000 subscribers at $84 a year, that has an abridged version of the daily news stories. I think we've got the mix right for us.

It works because we've been able to unharness the manpower that used to be devoted to daily print, and free them to work on Web-first content. That's been the big revelation. When you have print on a daily basis, then everything funnels into those print deadlines. Everything backs up from that, and everything that you're doing is oriented toward that one deadline, so you're not really optimizing your posts for the Web, you're not thinking about trending stories, you're not thinking about when the best time to post something is, and you're not living Web-first. And that's what we've done in the past year. We've taken a culture that had been a traditional news culture, and we've transitioned them to a Web-first one where they understand the rhythms of the Web better. That's probably been a big factor in contributing to our increase in Web traffic.

The Christian Science Monitor: Treeless

Today marks the last day of The Christian Science Monitor's daily print edition. Starting Monday, the Monitor will publish online only, with the exception of one weekly print edition. Go here to read a letter from John Yemma, the editor. Go here for reminiscences from many Monitor staffers, past and present.

Go here for an interview between Yemma and NPR's Terry Gross.

Unlike other papers that depend primarily on advertising to pay the bills, the Monitor should be able to make the transition without resorting to massive cuts in the newsroom -- the dreaded 12 percent solution -- or a decrease in the quality or scope of the journalism. Or so we hope.

I got my first clip -- and first paycheck -- from the Monitor for a feature on pidgin and creole languages, pegged to the work of two Stanford professors. bk

near and far

Just when you get to thinking that blogs are senseless, the following comment blows in, illustrating, if nothing else, the far reach of information. I do not know who "F" is -- but thank you. You can find the article "F" references here.

F said...

Hi,I am an english senior from China. I have just read your article - College:Time for passionate pursuits - on an old magazine.I guess the article was written five years ago.However, the scene exactly depicts what we experience at class now.As senior students, many of my classmates are busy seeking for jobs or just sleeping in their dorms. Once there are only three students attending the class. Our teacher said he liked small class but I can feel his disappointment. I hope I can meet people who are passionate with their own ideas instead of majority followers but I feel it is not very likely especially when the reality push us to be realists.

I like the ending of this articles very much.

Thanks for your articles.

the monitor goes web-only

Go here (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=99239994#commentBlock) to listen to John Yemma, the editor of The Christian Science Monitor, on Fresh Air with Terry Gross. He talks about the paper's new business/publishing model as the paper goes online only during the week, with a print edition on weekends only.

He also discusses web-first journalism, and how that will significantly change the look, feel and interaction of the website. He predicts stories will be shorter, some will be faster, others will be "bloggier." And there will be traditional, longer stories, too.

He also predicts that to meet cost targets, the Monitor, one of the country's most well-respected papers, may have to decrease staff by 10 percent. Still, he says, the Monitor will retain its large stable of international correspondents.

He also addresses the big issue, prompted by a question from Terry Gross: who will pay for the news? And what will happen if no one does? bk

- more -

Back to thirty:

The LA Times reports that the Christian Science Monitor will become the nation's first newspaper to drop its daily print edition in favor of its online "treeless" edition. A sign of the times, or a prudent economic move? You have to hope that the 5 million online page-views will be able to support a robust reporting staff and that the journalism will remain the same quality that earned the paper seven Pullitzers. But still. It's a sign of the times.

In response, former capstoner Timi Gould, who once had "latimes.com" in her email address, wonders: "IS online the answer? Are online ad sales more profitable? Are online articles the same quality as those that would run in the paper? Is newspaper page layout and design a thing of the past?"

To which my answer is, well, I don't have one. But I do have some questions of my own.

For example, in Monday's column about the increasing polarization of the news media, Howard Kurtz wonders whether Fox's Sean Hannity and MSNBC's Keith Olberman are "watching the same presidential race, or even living in the same country?"

He continues: "Prime-time viewers of Fox News and MSNBC get vastly different perspectives on the campaign that sometimes approach mirror images. This goes well beyond the hosts' political views to the booking of guests and the way stories are framed, pumped up and sometimes ignored. In that sense, the programs reflect the increasing polarization of the media world, where columnists, strategists, bloggers and radio talkers have built thriving careers catering to those who already agree with them."

Here's what worries me: as daily newspapers (and the straight-ahead journalism that they support) shrink, the growth industry appears to be opinion, either via cable or the blogosphere. Not sure that makes for an informed citizenry. Full disclosure: I am an Olberman junkie. Still, I recognize that folks like him and Hannity are preaching to the choir. But. Does everyone?

Finally, this is so preposterous, I can't even comment. According to a piece in USA Today last week, Media News Group CEO Dean Singleton, whose media company has presided over the near-dismantling of our beloved Mercury News, spoke to the Southern Newspaper Publishers Association, suggesting that newspapers consider outsourcing many of their daily operations.

Really?!

"One thing we're exploring is having one news desk for all of our newspapers in MediaNews ... maybe even offshore," said Singleton, whose company owns 54 newspapers, several in the Bay Area, and who may well be the poster child for Molly Ivins' apochryphal comment about newspapers committing suicide.

Of course, that's just my opinion (Yep, I'm doing just what I worry about. See above.) bk

egregious self-promotion

So I wrote this op-ed on choice overload for the Christian Science Monitor a few months ago. It was reprinted in Santa Clara Magazine's fall issue, which just came out. I'd be very interested in your feedback as to whether or not you can relate. You can email me directly or leave an anonymous comment.

btw, hideous picture. bk