Sounds like very tough times ahead. Will be praying for you mate.

I'm interested in hearing feedback on anyone who thinks Southern Cross is deficient in any key regards.

1. If you really wanted to click 'none of the above' please comment here.

2. Is there anyone who would like a significant rethink of Southern Cross content. For example should we move in the direction of producing a more evangelistic product that churches could hand out to newcomers and the unchurched. (Salvation Army do this with War Cry)...

[Although can I say upfront that I am not yet convinced that the 'evangelistic' option is financially viable]

From your list, I think straight "Bible Teaching" is most dispensable. That (very important) area is already well covered by other parties.

I particularly like the practical ministry stories, and also the local news roundup.

I'm not a big fan of the War Cry, not really sure about that direction. Maybe if it was really well done...

I like knowing what is going on around the Diocese. It reminds me that I am part of a bigger "church" in the Sydney and world wide Anglican church than my own little one. I get world wide mission info/input from a couple of Mission organisations.

Although I "read" Southern Cross on-line,in short grabs, I also like to pick up the paper and read. There is nothing like sitting down with a cup of tea and having a leisurely read.

Craig

From your list, I think straight "Bible Teaching" is most dispensable. That (very important) area is already well covered by other parties.

Thoroughly disagree. Think that any paper that goes to the 'pews' has an enormous opportunity and responsibility to teach, exhort and provide opportunity for reasoned disagreement.

Di

I'm not a big fan of the War Cry, not really sure about that direction. Maybe if it was really well done...

No I would not do War Cry as such.

The January glossy 'Connect09' edition was my attempt to make a step in that direction. It was full of conversion stories and had a gospel explanation and an apologetics piece from John Dickson.

Oh, ok. Yeah, I liked the January SC a lot, it was beautiful.

Dunno how it gets in the hands of unbelievers though. I'm not really in the habit of giving away magazines to friends...

The really interesting issue to me is how we make these cutbacks while protecting the skill-base to maintain the Diocese's web presence.

Anyone game to argue that we should close Southern Cross all together and concentrate on web-based video resourcing of parishes?

If it's a choice between the two, then you have to invest in the web. That's got to be a no-brainer.

It would be a shame to get rid of paper and ink entirely, as it still has a big place. But if you can only do one well, do the web.

Di, you said

Thoroughly disagree. Think that any paper that goes to the 'pews' has an enormous opportunity and responsibility to teach, exhort and provide opportunity for reasoned disagreement.

I thoroughly agree with your thorough disagreement.

What (potentially) makes Southern Cross evangelically distinctive is a commitment to the Reformed gospel, which necessarily includes Bible teaching and application.

If SC is just a well-run piece of journalism, along the lines of the better examples of what gets put in local letterboxes, then let's thank God for it and move it completely out from under the protective (subsidized) umbrella of Sydney Anglican synod. It will then stand on its own merits, and be healthier and better as a result.

Because in the area of good journalism, capitalism beats socialism any day of the week.

That's a huge false dilemna Gordo. You're saying SC either runs bible exegesis or it essentially becomes a secular newspaper. There are many other options.

One is for it to focus on reporting diocesan and Christian news and opinion, as well as practical ministry - as it already does. I don't see that throwing in the odd exegesis somehow redeems this other content.

Do you really want it to be just a pale imitation of The Briefing? What's the point - we are well served in that area already.

Have you considered alternative revenue and capital streams? One (medium-long term) possibility which comes to mind lies in tactfully soliciting fractional bequests (even small portions of estates might in the aggregate go a long way.)

That's a huge false dilemna Gordo. You're saying SC either runs bible exegesis or it essentially becomes a secular newspaper. There are many other options.

I don't say it's either/or.

I do say that if SC loses a commitment to evangelical distinctiveness, why should Sydney Anglicans subsidize it?

Someone might respond, well SC is not about being evangelically distinctive (either primarily or secondarily), but if that is so, then the question of why it should be subsidized in any way becomes even sharper.

I do say that if SC loses a commitment to evangelical distinctiveness, why should Sydney Anglicans subsidize it?

No-one suggested they should! I simply said I don't see straight Bible teaching as it's primary function.

I simply said I don't see straight Bible teaching as it's primary function.

Actually, you said:

From your list, I think straight "Bible Teaching" is most dispensable.

And that's what I was disagreeing with. I think it's easy to rally under the banner Sola Scriptura (Bible alone) in a theoretical sense, but it seems to me that under pressure (eg financial pressure, such as we are facing now), it's one of the things that goes out the window most easily.

But let me ask the broader question then—what does it mean for Southern Cross to be evangelically distinctive?

But let me ask the broader question then—what does it mean for Southern Cross to be evangelically distinctive?

Pretty straight-forward. It reports evangelical news (as opposed to news about state politics, or car crashes, or whatever). And it includes opinion pieces written by evangelicals.

I don't think adding in a little bible exegesis at the end somehow washes back over the news and views content, to make it more "evangelical". If the diocese wants to publish a journal of bible and theology, they should do that. But I think SC is intended as a newspaper.

If it's a choice between the two, then you have to invest in the web. That's got to be a no-brainer.

Except the paper still has a far bigger 'reach' into the pews than the website. Depending how you read the data somewhere between 4 to 10 times as many Sydney Anglican lay people read the paper over Sydneyanglicans.net

This is reflected in the advertising revenue streams.

You would have to think that those proportions are going to switch around in the future though, wouldn't you?

It would be a disaster for AM to slacken off it's commitment to the web...

The key is to report news and write reviews etc from an evangelical perspective. This means that, whether or not the article is explicitly Bible teaching or not, what is written is still edifying and true. I see a place for SC provided this is what is maintained and strengthened.

There are some big issues at the moment to which SC, in my view, ought to be contributing. To examples come to mind: More discussion on what we do in church in the light of the constructive debate between Tony Payne and David Peterson (to which I and others contributed) Should the Glebe Board ever again borrow money to invest in the stock market? What biblical principles would shape this discussion?

Should the Glebe Board ever again borrow money to invest in the stock market? What biblical principles would shape this discussion?

Probably half a dozen people have chatted to me about the whole financial issue over the last couple of weeks. It's going to be a hot topic. I think some people in pew-land are going to be asking serious questions...

Thanks for the feedback Philip.

You would have to think that those proportions are going to switch around in the future though, wouldn't you?

Maybe. Maybe not. The internet is moving quickly towards being a video-based medium. Sydney Anglicans are a strongly text-based culture.

There is predicted to be a 10-15% shift in advertising streams away from print and towards web over the next few years. This is mainly around the video advertising opportunties.

Nevertheless, this is not happening fast enough to justify dumping the paper all together.

lol - I feel like I was led into a trap on that one. ;-)

It's a tough business...will be interested to see what you guys end up doing...

G'day,

The new (as of today) online version of Southern Cross is great. A motor sport magazine that I subscribe to has been available in this type of format for 2 years. This has great scope to save Anglican Media money because it will reduce the need for printed copies. But printed copies will still be needed for a while yet.

One thing that has always struck me is how many copies of Southern Cross remain untaken. I can only think of 1 church that I've been a part of (out of 8) where this hasn't been the case. Finding how many copies are actually needed in churches might provide a way to cut down on how many copies are printed.

Yours in Christ,
Mark

Craig said:

I feel like I was led into a trap on that one. ;-)

I didn't mean it as a trap. I personally feel torn on this.. which is why it is a dilemma.


Mark said:

Finding how many copies are actually needed in churches might provide a way to cut down on how many copies are printed.

We've done this before of course. But find that most churches just guess. I think we may need to find a radically different distribution model.

Indeed at the volumes we print even cutting back copies by 15% (3,000 - 4,000 copies) will only save about $600 per issue. Its peanuts when we need to cut our costs by $400k.

How much money would going back to black and white on non-glossy paper save you? You could maybe spin it as a positive, one of those "retro-cool" things.

I guess you are also thinking about going bi-monthly. That would hurt...

We already print on very cheap paper (you'll see its very thin).

Colour printing is very cheap these days. So I doubt that's going to be the solution. Indeed it may negatively impact advertisers & thus end up not being a saving at all.

I see that my poll shows that the one area people would be OK losing is 'reviews of Christian books and resources'.

That result surprises me somewhat.

Does anyone find our culture/review section valuable?

Or perhaps I should be asking what if anything in the usual back 3 pages of the paper do people like and find helpful/valuable?

I don't want to throw the baby out with bathwater.

There are many people who do not use the internet, and many who do use it still prefer printed copies and those book thingies.

I like the new version of Southern Cross online, but I'd still prefer a magazine , if I were able to get my hands on one out here in the sticks.

Was the Mother's Day special embedded to spring to life automatically, or did I click on something without realising it? My wife liked the song.

Jeremy,

What would be the dangers with going with a model that charges a fee for all printed versions but free for the online version?

Yours in Christ,
Mark

To satisfy my own curiosity what circulation does SC have and what does a year's subscription cost?

I think it would be a great pity to go under.

I would cut out Bible Reading material - there is just soooo much good material available.

Why not take the plunge and put the price up - as a byproduct that will test how valuable people consider SC.

Why not consider a web only version, but how do you cover costs? A year or two ago UCCF ceased publication of Themelios, thankfully The Gospel Coalition picked it up as web only, no cost publication. Four editions out under new arrangements and the most recent has some great articles re inerrancy debate.

On another point: is it really true that the Committees of the Church are having their grants reduced by 50%? I find that really hard to believe, although I also note someone's comment, "Should the Glebe Board ever again borrow money to invest in the stock market?" If they have, then I hope questions are asked and maybe the odd head roll.

In the PCV our Trusts Corporation is forecasting a 20% decline in Comittee/congregational common fund deposits for 2009/10, with further smaller declines to follow in subsequent years - however difficult to make comparisons when trust deeds vary so much from one church to another and I doubt very much our trust deed (a 19th C Act of Parliament) would allow our trustees to borrow in order to invest on the stock exchange.

is it really true that the Committees of the Church are having their grants reduced by 50%?

Overall there will be 50% cuts. The details of the cutbacks haven't been decided. (ie if x get 40% and y get 60%)

The extent of the losses is because the endowment was highly geared.

Mark said:

What would be the dangers with going with a model that charges a fee for all printed versions but free for the online version?

The idea of a cover charge is one I was planning to raise in my 2nd phase of market research.

I have some thoughts on making it a win/win for parishes (ie allowing parishes to charge a substantial 'margin' that they could use to reinvest in their own ministry initiatives).

The danger is that some parishes will decline to take SC if they are charged for it. Furthermore, if circulation drops then advertising revenue will also drop.

How price sensitive is our market? This is a question I can only determine with proper research.. ie beyond a web poll! :)

My gut feeling is that a cover charge would be the beginning of the end for printed SC.

I wonder if maybe you should just go quarterly with a thicker "news review" style of magazine?

Or perhaps I should be asking what if anything in the usual back 3 pages of the paper do people like and find helpful/valuable?

My suspicion is that they have less appeal than other sections of the mag - and I say that as someone who has written quite a few of said reviews.

I'll hazard a guess that our diocese are a fairly sophisticated crowd who feel they can judge pop culture for themselves pretty well. Regarding Christian resources, not so sure. Maybe there's a feeling it's going to be kid gloves used, especially with locally produced material.

I would be interested to see what your advertisers say would make the SC more attractive.

Higher circulation and better reach into the Sydney Anglican market. My biggest rival in our market for the advertising $$ is 103.2 FM

I would happily consider giving one to each member as they came to church if I had enough, which would quickly increase the circulation

I would strongly prefer parishes receive more copies so you can hand out SC rather than cut back, for the reason you mention.

An extra 2,000 copies costs me just $150. I can easily recoup that through increased advertising revenues.

What would be the effect of printing on the same quality paper but reduce the size to magazine dimensions?

Thats definately an option I am exploring.

My initial conversations with advertisers suggests that the size format does not bother them too much either way.

G'day,

Craig said:

I wonder if maybe you should just go quarterly with a thicker "news review" style of magazine?

I mentioned earlier that the motorsport magazine that I subscribe to has for 2 years been using the online format that Southern Cross has started using today. Before they did this they published a hard copy magazine every fortnight. Now they publish an e-zine every week and a hard copy magazine once a month. This model has worked very well for this magazine.

Maybe SC could be published as an e-zine monthly with a bigger, more indepth hardcopy version published quarterly.

Yours in Christ,
Mark

Maybe SC could be published as an e-zine monthly with a bigger, more indepth hardcopy version published quarterly.

Thanks Mark.

I'd be interested in exploring this with advertisers. It will probably be determined by the take up of the online version by the bulk of lay people.

The data suggests online SC has most of its take-up geographically outside Sydney Diocese, even o/s. This market doesn't appeal to our advertisers.

Perhaps that's different for motorsport advertisers who aren't so sensitive about the location of readers?

Jeremy,

One positive of the e-zine format for advertisers is the way in which readers can click on hyperlinks embedded in the ad to go straight to the advertiser's web page.

Yours in Christ,
Mark

Jeremy,

My ideal edition of Southern Cross includes:
1. An article that I can recommend St Mark's members read because it provides a helpful model of how to think Christianly about some current event or issue.
2. A report of some mission related happening going on elsewhere in the diocese that might spark an idea for me in our ministry at St Mark's.
3. Nothing that would make me hesitate to 'accidentally' leave my copy at the barber's or doctor's where a non-Christian might pick it up rather than a Time Magazine from 1876. For this reason, the first thing I'd lose would be the letters to the editor and articles on the conflict going on in the Anglican Communion which can sometimes just reinforce a 'see how these Christians fight' thing. It would however include a testimony, conversion story or short article of 'practical theology' or something that might get that person at the barbers thinking as a consequence of picking it up.

Those are my preferences.

Craig
www.stmarks.com.au

How does one read the e-version of SC?? I've tried to open it & read it but failed. Help Please.
Ken Langshaw

Magazine size would be good. I find the current size a bit unwieldy, especially as the paper is so thin...

@Ken
To read the online version of Southern Cross, you will need to have a fairly new Adobe Flash player installed.
Let webmaster know if you still have issues (webmaster_at_sydneyanglicans_dot_net)

SC has definitely evolved into a great publication - I love the culture and book/cd reviews most of all. I think in these areas it outstrips Matthias' Briefing for readability and insight, and I'd be curious to know how they're fairing the competition. It would be a great shame to see it cease to be published.

Jeremy,

I reckon reducing the format size to that of a magazine is a no brainer if:
- it reduces overall cost of paper stock per edition;
- it doesn't concern the bulk of your advertisers; and
- it makes it logistically 'easier' for active distribution to parishioners (with the possibility then of increased circulation and advertising revenue).

I also reckon you could go bimonthly which would mitigate the lack of currency you would have by going quarterly. You could pitch this as a temporary and responsible way to deal with the current economic situation AMS finds itself in with SC returning to a monthly publication when the fiscal situation improves.

What would be the estimate cost to the reader per issue if we were to charge for SC?

Peter.

Jeremy, thanks for asking our opinion. I love SC, especially the last few years. If we had enough money I'd love you to keep going as is.

FYI, we easily hand all our copies out each month. That's because someone stands at the door as people leave simply saying, "Do you want this month's SC?" Most people grab it if asked.

And I am confident enough in the publication to do this. In fact, I want to ask you to up the number you send us (which you have done when I asked before). Perhaps rectors didn't know this was possible.

I voted in the poll, but to give more info, these are the features I think are most important to retain - in rough descending order of importance.

- Practical ministry features about the mission
- Bible teaching 'features' from theologians and other experts
- Testimonies and conversion stories
- Report news from St Andrews House and Diocesan organisations
- News from other Sydney Anglican churches

The ones below are nice, but not in my view essential - I find they are not the sections I personally rush to read, although I can see others would like the reviews.

News from the wider Christian world
Reviews of Christian books and resources

I differ from Craig Schafer in that I would not want Letters to the Editor to go. I think it is important to have a discussion valve if there is to be a print version. I also think it needs to be targeted at our church members. If you do occasional outreach oriented editions, that's great, but it's really a whole different style.

I also think a print version is important as many seniors (& others) do not use the web.

Monthly is also important if news is to be a significant part of the content.

I don't mind a reduction in size.

I would be happy to see a cost charge to parishes being explored, but not a cover price for attenders. (I.e. parishes pay a contribution, not individuals). Not sure if this would work though, unless it was compulsory and I am not sure that would get up.

I agree with Sandy both on the letters to the editor and the way to get SC into people's hands. If we don't invite people to take a copy it is far less likely that they will grab one from a pile somewhere.

The Southern Cross is an important publication; and many of its readers are not going to read it on line. Keep the Archbishop's monthly article; that is very important to many of the people who read SC at Wahroonga. They like to read Peter's thoughts and challenges on a range of issues.

Thanks for all the feedback. Craig Schafer and Sandy Grant's views really represent the two distinct directions we could go in.

You'll note that in the Jan C09 edition we did indeed take out the letters and all the 'inside' conflict stories... so it could be handed out to fringe contacts without embarrassment.

What this comes down is what you think Southern Cross 'core' job should be.. informing the key ministry people or reaching out to the fringe. The content of the paper will be shaped by which you think is the priority audience.

What would be the estimate cost to the reader per issue if we were to charge for SC?

I will conduct market testing to work that out.

I understand that some other Diocesan publications charge 50 cents per issue with a bulk discount for parishes. That's the sort of model I want to explore. (Though I'm listening closely to what the rectors here have said so far about this)

I understand that some other Diocesan publications charge 50 cents per issue with a bulk discount for parishes. That's the sort of model I want to explore. (Though I'm listening closely to what the rectors here have said so far about this)

And as another rector, I'd argue against charging. It will mean yet more admin. for parishes as money is collected and sent on, and I don't think that would be at all helpful. Further, it is another disincentive for people to take a copy. We could no longer offer them at the door without asking people for money.

If parishes pay the cost for church members, I think you will find many parishes will opt out.

Yes Philip the chocolate biscuits at morning tea are more important than Southern Cross. I know my place! :)

More seriously, if we can't raise new revenue streams to cover mailing then we may need to focus on new delivery mechanisms such as email and video.

Any thoughts on the take-up of video in church services?

On video, as a general rule, in my thinking, it needs to be 3-4 minutes max and under. In other words, the same sort or length as a song or hymn.

I am glad that we get info and updates and promos (e.g. from CMS, or KCC, or SX Digital, etc) in video format, but unless a longer video is absolutely excellent, I tend to select a highlight section (if possible) that is shorter.

The reason is we always struggle with going over time and I don't want to put more pressure on towards reducing the time for ministry of the word (read and preached).

If you have to go to net and video, I would suggest considering a quarterly paper or magazine for highlights and specials features that don't work online. This will at least do something to keep the non-net people - who are an important and still large part of our diocesan family - in the loop!

Would something in print on a weekly basis (ie a church bulletin insert) really small/short work for parishes?

Also for parishes logistically - does bi-monthly or quarterly make any difference?

Regarding video, 15+ minutes is too long, and I suspect most ministers will not have the time (or inclination) to chop out the section they want. Perhaps you need to provide links to the component parts.

Hi Craig,

The SX Digital DVD that goes to parishes includes all the individual components as separate clips, as well as the full length 'magazine'.

Ah, ok. I haven't seen that. Shiny.

Southern Cross is excellent in keeping our congregations aware of the contextual concentric circle they are in- parish in Nw in Western Region in Sydney in NSW in Australia etc etc. Most of the people at church are positive about SC. Why not just charge per unit? I think most churches will buy enough for the people who want it?

I'm surprised you distribute it free - I think there ought to be a per copy charge which the local church could pick up with the proviso that hard up Parishes/Home Mission Stations could opt out of paying the charge.

There is a lot to be said for user pays, if only because it is a more sure way of assessing whether or not SC is meeting your congregants interests.

Does the PCA in Victoria have a publication David?

Is it subscriber only? And if so does it have much reach into the pews?

Just wondering...

Hi Jeremy,

The PCA publishes AP which is a paid subscription monthly magazine, not sure the split between subscription income and central church funding, but the latter significant. The pcv does a free quarterly news magazine (strictly news rather than views, letters to ed, etc), very plain, either 8, 12 pages which is distributed free to all Parishes/HMS.

Probably the better comparison is what the PCA (NSW) does with its monthly newsmagazine, Pulse, which is more like SC(?) - if it helps I could email you details contact person.

David

Yes thanks: jhalcrow_at_anglicanmedia_dot_com_dot_au or just send me a pm by clicking on my name here.

Hi Jeremy, in the wider publishing industry, are magazines growing or dying?

I'd love to hear John Sandeman answer that question.

Overall newspapers and news-magazines are in serious decline. In Australia we have seen Bulletin/Newsweek fold. In America a number of significant metro dailies have gone bust.

I think the primary reason for this is that classified advertising (position vacant, car sales, real estate) has gone online. Its less of case of the newspaper readership going online. Classifieds used to pay for a massive chunk of editorial staffing.

At Anglican Media we aren't hit as much by this issue because we never had real estate or cars adverts.

For those interested in debating the future of Southern Cross in the light of trends in the wider media landscape there is an a debate at Crikey at the moment about the decline of newspapers in Australia.

Hi Jeremy,

This is a great way to ask our opinions, but I'm afraid it's only the opinions of a small minority of SC readership; that is the online bloggers. Hope there's something about this in the next issue.

I wonder what the original purpose for the SC was? Was it a gazette reporting church and diocese news? For me, it's one of the few ways to see what's going on in the diocese without tapping into the grape-vine. What ever the original purpose of the SC was it should be taken into consideration before moving into a particular direction.

The features and reviews are great, keep them as it promotes discussion, thought and debate. It makes the SC more of a magazine than a gazette, which is one of the things I enjoy about it. But I'm certainly not comfortable in seeing church news going - or letters to the editor for reasons outlined previously.

It'd be good to also ask what the demographic of the readership is and why they read it. And rather than asking "what would I like to cut", ask "what feature / element makes me read the SC". Because I'm a humble reader I've no idea what should be cut, but I certainly know what I like.

Hope this has been helpful. God bless in making these tough decisions.

I enjoy the reviews too - but I can get reviews anywhere. The thing that SC is uniquely able to provide is diocesan news. Seems to me that has to be the core service you deliver. Diocesan opinion/commentary would be a close second...

Hi Chris,

SC was started in the mid-sixties before I was born!

My understanding is that Archbishop Gough was having a bit of trouble getting positive coverage out of the main evangelical paper at the time - The Australian Church Record. He wanted a mechanism to circumvent the ACR and conservative evangelical clergy and speak direct to the parishioners.

I'm not sure this has much relevance to now!

In terms of SC's purpose - in recent years the paper has tried to be build unity around the Diocesan Mission. That's not going to change.

I'll answer your other points in my next column/blog.

My understanding is that Archbishop Gough was having a bit of trouble getting positive coverage out of the main evangelical paper at the time - The Australian Church Record. He wanted a mechanism to circumvent the ACR and conservative evangelical clergy and speak direct to the parishioners.

I'm not sure this has much relevance to now!

rofl - that is priceless!

Hi Jeremy,

As you know down here in Canberra and Goulburn we have a monthly Diocesan newspaper which is produced in Bathurst and circulated free to Parishes. It's much improved in recent years (Hi Lew!). Each month I try to highlight a relevant or interesting article and we then pass it out as people leave for Morning Tea.

It's certainly not as glossy as Southern Cross and doesn't engage as much with the broader culture or have as many in-depth articles. On the plus side the relative lack of central media resources and the smaller size of the Diocese means it (probably) carries a higher percentage of articles which are generated by the grassroots. Not all these stories are equally inspiring but at its best this does provide a mechanism for Parishes and other ministries to share innovative approaches to ministry and mission. It's also easier to plug to a congregation when they can recognise themselves in one of the articles or photo's!

I know the larger size of Sydney Diocese introduces a different dynamic but maybe there are some transferrable principles......

As a country boy Lew always tells me the press works differently in the bush. What you a describing is really the way a 'gossip' page works in a metro paper.

BTW - I should have added that we will be doing a reader survey in the next edition of Southern Cross.

Jeremy,

When we moved from Sydney to the bush discovering the dynamics of country media was delightful. We were living in a shire of 6,000 - 7,000 with a bi-weekly newspaper. Every sporting event in town, from the under 6B baton twirlers up, got a detailed report including a mention of the best players (in practice this often meant all players were named, especially in the younger years). Our first son grew up believing it was normal to see your name in the media each week. So if he decides to become a reality TV star we'll know when the seeds were sown....

Jeremy, as a minister serving outside the Sydney Diocese I am not in a position to comment on its relevance or otherwise to congregations in Sydney but I do want to encourage you to recognise what a valuable resource SC is in opening up the minds and hearts of people in my congregations to gospel matters. I have been personally subscribing for years and over the last 9 years I have been receiving 25 copies (all of which disappear before the month is out) I'm sure that SC is one tool that is assisting me to grow a more biblically literate and biblically minded church. I would count it a personal disappointment to see SC disappear in its present form (thankyou for your generosity in sending the copies - I don't think I even get charged a personal subscription anymore!)

sshhh, David!

The bean counters are listening.

The quick survey of the 2 dozen or so Anglican newspapers/magazines both from around Aus and the rest of the Communion:
- They are a variety of tabloid sized newspapers & standard sized magazines - SC is the only one in its size & gloss group, and,
- Melbourne is the only one with a quickly apparent price on it, $1, but that does not mean people are charged it.

My family has not bought a newspaper this year - we went cold-turkey at the end of 2008 and now rely on useful magazines for analysis and on-line for news.

Cool. Thanks Jeremy!

Never fear, I was born 20 years after the mid-60s!

Hi Jeremy
we have no trouble moving the copies we are sent.
I think in my relatively short history in this diocese the quality of Sx has dramatically improved and its an attractive and relatively safe rag to whack on the table as people walk in. well done.
my wife is not a blogger or very tech savvy and she is always keen on the southern cross paper, she rates it high in terms of her interest whereas I hardly ever read it because I don't read print media much anymore and prefer to control what I read through the computer.

maybe this is the wrong forum to be asking? those who really value it are still waiting for your article on SX to turn up with mail?!!!!

on that - most of the stuff I have seen in the southern cross my wife reads either has been on line or ends up online.
1. is this true?
2. have you thought about having more exclusive print media and exclusive online media?
3. maybe more of a journal than a newspaper format that covers fuller articles that relate to being

on letter to the editor - the static nature of that forum means if you get a letter in it gets quote a say - arguably more than its worth - whereas as the tonnes of comments and lively debate made here go relatively unnoticed ( sometimes for the better!).

from my perspective the letters to the editor doesn't work in a world of fast paced conversation - even the dailys seem to struggle with this now?

praying for you guys as tough decisions are no doubt made.

Speaking of having some stuff exclusively in the print version [or on-line version], I find it annoying that quite a bit of what is published in The Briefing has already appeared online.

I'm pleased that what I read in Southern Cross hasn't previously appeared on the website.

Thanks for the feedback everyone.

While I really appreciate the praise for my part in improving SC's quality, I am realist enough to know that this has only been possible because the Diocese has been blessed to provide enough resources to enable a professional & skilled team to be assembled here.

@ James. Given that Anglican Media's future resources are likely to be similar to the other metropolitan dioceses - do any of these publications stand out to you as being a good read?

RE: print v online.

The issue of overlap is one I have been grappling with for the past 5 years.

Given that you can now read the whole pdf of SC online here its clear than online readers have the benefit of far greater access to material because of the nature of the mediums.

Nevertheless there is plenty of material in the 'hardcopy' SC that isn't appropriate for the online format - longer features, the cartoon etc. Furthermore - John Sandeman's column is another example of a print exclusive.

RE: letters to the ed. Its interesting that they have dried up somewhat since we moved away from the forums and towards 'commenting' here. While, its important we dont disenfranchise those demographics that are print only by liquidating 'letters' - whether a whole page is sustainable and helpful is another matter.

I do think there is a danger that the SC letters page will become a 'Grandpa Simpson' forum, as the dynamism moves here. Its seems to me that professional church workers will increasingly look to the blogosphere for the outside support in their ministries.

Jeremy - all the metrops are a good read (what else can I say - I work at the General Synod Office :))

One point thought - the articles in Perth's that are written by the the heads of the Anglican organisations are a little less infomercial then elsewhere.

Correction from earlier post - Perth is priced at $1 too but the price is very subtle.

Magazines?
A day late, but here is bit of an answer to how magazines are going. Many generalist magazines are in trouble (think Newsweek, Women's weekly) with circulation problems. The net does gossip so well.
Some specialist magazines are zooming (think The Economist).

Contra Jeremy, the newspapers that have recently closed in the US are papers that have been part of "Joint Operating Agreements" that have kept the weaker paper in a two newspaper town (think Denver) alive. If the Boston Globe goes under in the next few weeks it will be the the first time that a dominant newspaper has gone bust. If not Boston or Chicago it could be Philadephia, or Hartford, but it will happen.

Grandpa Simpson?
The more immediate issue might be a Bart Simpson culture, here.

I think it was Jeremy who said that commenting goes down when Moore College is on mission. If Sydang.com is dominated by the professionals and professionals-in-training, who looks after the pewsitters? If SX vanished tomorrow (which it will not) would the reach of Sydney Anglican media be narrowed?

Thanks John. So gossip is in trouble in print? What do the 'zooming' specialist magazines have in common? The Economist is certainly at the quality end of the spectrum...

If SX vanished tomorrow (which it will not) would the reach of Sydney Anglican media be narrowed?

A resounding yes :)

Compelling or unique content is the key. But sooner or later someone (Rupert) will work out a way to get money from web publishing and trash will have a future, too..

Some great names will disappear, and others will start up. Will it be the Huffington Post or the Washington Post? The Daily Telegraph or the Daily Beast?

Will it be Sydney Anglicans or Oz29? Or video sites hosted by individual parishes?

Jeremy, what is the ratio of production vs distribution costs?

Will it be Sydney Anglicans or Oz29?

hehe. Now we are getting close to the bone :)

Thinking about the future comms needs of Oz29 is an interesting hypothetical.

what is the ratio of production vs distribution costs?

What are you driving at Craig? And what would you mean by 'production'?

Its probably not wise for me to discuss much of this in detail as it involves commercial arrangements with printers etc.

I was wondering if the bulk of the cost was in the paper and ink, or in distributing 50,000 magazines each month, that's all.

printing costs more than mailing.

The SX model has extremely cheap distribution costs, a few cents a copy. (This is not commercially sensitive information. Australia Post rates are public information)

One of the best things about Southern Cross is the opportunity to get our churches thinking about issues that simply aren't going to be covered by the average expositional sermon, like Andrew Cameron's piece on social justice this month. It is a great forum for sharing thought about church that goes beyond justifying what our particular churches already do.

In these past 94 comments, I have yet to understand what the core business of SX actually is. I enjoy many of its elements, (I am sure readership will decline sharply if John S ever stops his sitting), but I am none the wiser of its main intent for all my perusing. (Maybe I am just not that bright)
Also, as much as I often hate it, we are in a user pays society. If the individual readers or congregations won't pay for it, is there a future for this entity? Rupert and his ilk would say no. If people wont pay, should action be taken to prevent the, perhaps inevitable, "we don't know what we've got until we lose it"

I did mention this earlier :)

The purpose of Southern Cross is to equip and build up the Sydney Anglican community in light of the goals of the Diocesan mission.

This can be done a number of ways:
- sharing ministry ideas
- discussing mission strategy
- equipping people to live as Christians
- explaining how God is changing people's lives (testimony)

It is in this sense that it is a Christian community newspaper.

Thanks Jeremy! (See - I am not that bright)

Regarding user pays... commercialism inevitable changes the nature of the media product as the drive for ratings takes priority.

If you ask the ABC to rely entirely advertising it will cease being the ABC and become Channel 10!!

The possibility that Southern Cross may need to enter a 'Channel 10' style commercial paradigm does make me question how that reality will impact the current mission statement.

Jeremy, the channel 10 example is a good and fair one - raising some interesting questions and possible challenges if user pays is one of the chosen revenue recovery paths.
I feel part of the question is one of ownership - is there a problem if the congregations in the Sydney Diocese are part owners? Will this cause a greater push for ratings than what is currently happening? Or, putting a different way, will reader pays (keeping in mind the main target demographic and who is likely / able to pay) dictate a change in the current mission statement, either ideologically or in practice?

Ideologically, I have no problem with a cover charge (in contrast to an advertising-only model) precisely because the congregations will retain ownership over the product.

I fear that the Sydney Anglican community isn't prepared to pay because it doesn't fully appreciate the implications of forcing Southern Cross to be advertising only.

(Its up to me to explain I guess!)

Jeremy,
From memory, a free diocesan newspaper commenced sometime in the 70's? from an ordinance of synod. It was to keep parishioners informed of the life of the diocese. Is this your understanding? Did this then become Southern Cross? When did SC commence? It needs to continue so that we can be kept informed of diocesan issues. Can it be reduced to A4 size?

When did SC commence? It needs to continue so that we can be kept informed of diocesan issues.

I answered that earlier in this thread. Archbishop Gough started it in the mid 60s.

At some point it became subscription only and was fairly poorly read from what I can tell.

The free newspaper started in 1995.

Can it be reduced to A4 size?

That's one option I'm looking at. It will come down to financial issues. A4 may not be viable if its means printing more pages and less space for advertising.

In the United States so many failing newspapers had to go with a subscription online version only. Perhaps this should be considered.