Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 3,227

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

The Christian Science Monitor: An Evolving Experiment in Journalism

Fuller, Linda K.·2011
DOI 10.5040/9798400605093
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This text provides a unique examination of The Christian Science Monitor, a highly respected, venerable news publication that has survived over a century of changes and challenges. The Christian Science Monitor is one of the world's leading journalistic publications, having won multiple Pulitzer prizes for its reporting. CSM is innovative and forward-thinking as well—it was one of the first newspapers to provide an online copy of its daily reporting in 1996, well before the popularization of the Internet. But just like other publications, The Christian Science Monitor will need to continue to reinvent itself in order to stay relevant and solvent in the face of plummeting readership numbers, corporate takeovers, and a widespread assumption that all of today's news sources are biased and inaccurate. This book provides a thorough discussion of CSM's treatment of sensitive topics like terrorism, international crises, gender issues, and sexual orientation. The paper's attitudes toward ethnicity, ethics, economics, philosophy, and racism are also profiled. The conclusion provides readers with an opportunity to draw upon their new knowledge of The Christian Science Monitor's past to project its direction for the future.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5040/9798400605093

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Fuller, L. K.
Publisher
ABC-CLIO, LLC
Published
2011
DOI
10.5040/9798400605093
OpenAlex
W2973149514
Cited by
3,227
References
0
FWCI
113.39
Type
book
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.