LifeSiteNews: "Readership Has Plummeted"

en.newsJul 10edited

LifeSiteNews: "Readership Has Plummeted"

Co-founder Steve Jalsevac published an in-depth statement about the removal of fellow co-founder John Henry Westen. He made his comment on X.com on 9 July.

In the statement, Jalsevac explains that John-Henry Westen wanted people to believe that he was LifeSiteNews, when in fact the work was done by a team.

He adds that for the first twelve years, the project was part of the Campaign Life Coalition (CLC), Canada’s national pro-life organisation. Its leader, Jim Hughes, was the first to recognise the need for an online news service: "LifeSite would never have existed without CLC."

Jalsevac claims that John-Henry Westen 'insisted that we change the highly successful LifeSiteNews mission to that of a traditional Latin Mass Catholic evangelising organisation'.

Board members Jim Hughes, Jalsevac and others opposed this change, as the majority of readers were neither traditional Latin Mass Catholics nor Catholic at all. Jalsevac adds: "Sadly, John-Henry was able to arrange a board vote that outnumbered those who never thought they would have to vote on such a dramatic change."

Jalsevac admits that "readership has plummeted" and donations have dramatically declined. He blames Westen’s "dramatic mission change" for this.

Jalsevac announced major changes to "survive", including a return to the founding mission and collaborative management.

#newsQoqtrknlom

2214 1.9K

la verdad prevaleceJul 10

Sandy Barrett shares this

Jul 10edited

Westen wrote on July 2: "Our content was viewed 81 million times on social media alone in the last two months" - so why then does Jalsevac claim that readership is plummeted? Who is lying?

1Share1 311

Faith In The RuinsJul 10

In business, it's all a game of who can massage what numbers. The data certainly doesn't lie. But people's interpretations absolutely can.
In the case of this statistic, is that overall views or unique views? Advertisers only care about the latter.

Harry JonesJul 10edited

LSN was becoming pseudo-Sede under Westen. Couple that with embracing conspiracies, flat-earthers, their anti-vax stance etc. it’s easy to see why he was removed, as well Kokx. They probably need to get rid of a few others too.

Sean JohnsonJul 10

Novus Ordo guy^^^

AJPMJul 10

John-Henry Westen - Thank you to all those who …

Fides Et Ratio shares this

Jul 10

1Share197

Sean JohnsonJul 10edited

Translation: Westin catered to trads, and they have neither the numbers nor the dollars, so we’re canning him and going full Novus Ordo: The heck with truth. Show me the money!

SeabassJul 10

Lifesite's early reporting on 'Francis' and Covid was a great indicator about the purpose they serve. It's certainly not for an interest in the Truth.

Malki TzedekJul 10

I never found JHW's comments particularly outrageous. Calling out doctrinal errors, even of popes, is hardly 'traditionalist'. That the recent popes have been so fixated on banishing the Latin mass strikes me as bizarre, and one doesn't have to be disdainful of 'Novus Ordo' to think so, I contend. We are called to correct one another out of charity so that when we come to the 'end of the race' as many of us make it over the finish line as possible. Bergoglio's papacy was divisive and flawed. That Prevost's approach seems to be a softsell of the same errors needs a clear and respectful pushback. I pray that JHW will find another means to do that.

Lionel Leslie AndradesJul 10

We must thank John Henry Weston for his work for the Catholic Church. It was only because of John Henry Westen's reporting on the Catholic Church that I would read Life Site News. Unlike some 15 years back there are now restrictions on pro-life news. John Henry allowed Catholics to read the reports of Archbishop Carlo Vigano which were blocked by other Catholic media. He would also cover the statements of Bishop Athanasius Schneider which were not covered by other conservative media. He was obviously being opposed in his coverage of traditionalist news and managed to survive; stay as editor in chief all these years,inspite of the political left opposition, from within and outside the Catholic Church. .I hope he comes back after this break, still with LifeSite News or other media.

Ivan TomasJul 10

"Board members Jim Hughes, Jalsevac and others opposed this change, as the majority of readers were neither traditional Latin Mass Catholics nor Catholic at all. Jalsevac adds: "Sadly, John-Henry was able to arrange a board vote that outnumbered those who never thought they would have to vote on such a dramatic change."
Tko ne razumije neka pokuša shvatiti da se koplja uvijek lome oko onog najvažnijeg, onog krucijanog, onog fundamentalnog.

Agatha JamesJul 10

I was a regular reader. I did notice that it was spending proportionally more resources on other issues besides Life issues. That's an issue with all groups -losing focus.
I became less frequent after I noticed a flagrant error that Jalsevac refused to admit -they basically ran a conspiracy site story without fact checking. Changing the comment section from Disqus did not help. Finally I was banned from commenting.
As someone else noted Social media has kind of taken over. So maybe the time of news websites is over?

123jussiJul 10

Lifesite tries to be everything to everyone and ends up defending the indefensible . The truth resides with Tradition but the money is with the Novus Ordo ,a problem for anyone needing general support.

Sandy BarrettJul 10

Jalsevac complains that "LifeSite has been widely viewed as a sedavacatist website" - but he himself once sent a fundraising letter about the great meeting with the [sedevacatist] Archbishop Viganò whom he highly praised....

Sally DormanJul 10

LifeSite is refusing to answering questions. Most online comments here on gloria.tv are critical of the move (to put it mildly)