Christian Science Monitor tries modernised approach

The Christian Science Monitor is attempting a careful revival of a reputation built over more than a century, even as it confronts steep declines in audience and staff that mirror the wider contraction of legacy news organisations.

The Monitor represents one of the longest-running experiments in values-driven journalism in the US, and its struggle to adapt offers a test case for whether measured, solutions-oriented reporting can survive in a digital environment that rewards speed and outrage.

Founded in 1908 by Mary Baker Eddy as a corrective to sensationalist journalism, the Monitor became known for sober international reporting and a tone shaped by the founder’s injunction “to injure no man, but to bless all mankind.” The paper has historically preserved editorial independence despite ownership by the Christian Science church and has earned seven Pulitzer Prizes across disciplines including international reporting and editorial cartooning.

Its reach today is far smaller than at its mid-20th-century peak. Paid subscribers have fallen from roughly 223,000 in 1970 to about 25,000, while full-time editorial staff has shrunk from nearly 160 at the start of the century to around 60 in 2025, according to reporting by the Boston Globe. The Monitor has also contended with dwindling church membership, controversies linked to the religion’s historical views on medical treatment and an industrywide shift towards digital platforms that prize virality over its measured approach.

The paper’s decision in 2009 to abandon daily print for a weekly edition was an early attempt to adapt, pairing a reduced print schedule with an emphasis on breaking news online. Web traffic initially grew, but sustaining digital subscriptions has proved difficult as competition intensified.

Under editor Christa Case Bryant and managing publisher Kenny D’Evelyn, the newsroom at Christian Science Plaza in Boston is pushing to modernise presentation and distribution. Plans include a print and digital redesign, a new app and expanded reach through aggregation platforms such as Apple News, where leaders say readership has risen since Bryant took the editor’s role in late 2024. The Monitor is also increasing short news briefs to position itself as a “first read” for time-pressed audiences.

Those initiatives have coincided with painful cuts. Buyouts in December reduced headcount, though the paper is recruiting for new roles including a senior congressional correspondent and a West Coast bureau chief.

Financial backing from the church gives the Monitor different commercial pressures from for-profit publishers, and Bryant has told staff that the board continues to invest even as it pushes for sustainability.

Editorially, leadership is reasserting the founding mission while seeking wider ideological range. Bryant has urged coverage that includes voices she says are often marginalised in mainstream outlets, including supporters of former president Trump’s Make America Great Again movement. “It’s not about promoting a particular political position or a set of issues,” she told staff. “It’s making sure that we’re not circumscribing what we think is important or valuable.” At the same time, the paper is reducing routine public health coverage in line with a more restrained tradition.

That temperament — solutions-oriented, humanitarian and deliberately calm — remains the Monitor’s defining asset and its commercial dilemma. Former editors recall a habit of seeking constructive angles. Francine Kiefer, a recently retired West Coast chief, said she kept a note reminding herself: “CSM stories: look for love.” The approach helped earn acclaim for coverage of international crises, including reporting that exposed the Srebrenica genocide.

The modern attention economy, however, is less forgiving of restraint. A digital subscription push launched in 2017 showed early promise before traffic and subscriptions slid. Industry observers point to the difficulty of translating a niche editorial identity into the scale needed online without diluting standards.

Source: Noah Wire Services

Noah Fact Check Pro

The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.

Freshness check

Score:
8

Notes:
The article from The Boston Globe, dated January 30, 2026, discusses The Christian Science Monitor’s recent initiatives to adapt to the digital age. The content appears original and timely, with no evidence of being recycled from other sources. However, the article’s focus on the Monitor’s efforts to modernise and expand its reach suggests that similar narratives may have been covered elsewhere, potentially leading to some overlap in reporting.

Quotes check

Score:
7

Notes:
The article includes direct quotes from Christa Case Bryant, Editor of The Christian Science Monitor, and Kenny D’Evelyn, Managing Publisher. While these quotes are attributed to their respective individuals, the absence of direct links to the original sources raises concerns about the ability to independently verify them. Without access to the original statements or interviews, the authenticity of these quotes cannot be fully confirmed.

Source reliability

Score:
9

Notes:
The Boston Globe is a reputable major news organisation, lending credibility to the article. However, the article’s reliance on information from The Christian Science Monitor’s leadership and internal initiatives introduces potential bias. The Monitor’s own publications, such as The Christian Science Journal, have also reported on similar topics, ([journal.christianscience.com](https://journal.christianscience.com/issues/2026/1/144-01/new-the-christian-science-monitor-app?utm_source=openai)) which may lead to a lack of independent verification and potential self-promotion.

Plausibility check

Score:
8

Notes:
The claims regarding The Christian Science Monitor’s declining readership and staff numbers are plausible and align with known industry trends. The reported initiatives to modernise and expand distribution through digital platforms and partnerships are consistent with efforts by other legacy news organisations facing similar challenges. However, the article’s focus on the Monitor’s internal strategies and perspectives may limit the scope of external verification.

Overall assessment

Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): PASS

Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): MEDIUM

Summary:
The article from The Boston Globe provides a timely and plausible account of The Christian Science Monitor’s efforts to modernise and adapt to the digital age. While the source is reputable and the content is accessible without a paywall, the heavy reliance on internal sources and the absence of direct links to original statements or external verification raise concerns about the independence and completeness of the information presented. Editors should exercise caution and consider seeking additional independent sources to corroborate the claims made in the article.