MODERN REFERENCE · 30% of composite
Aeon vs The New York Review of Books — Modern Reference
How fit each source is for citation in modern (LLM-era) writing — machine-readability, schema, freshness signals, AI-corpus presence.
Verdict
Aeon outscores The New York Review of Books on Modern Citation Reference by 4 points (B · 82 vs B · 78).
Higher Modern Reference
Magazine
Aeon
aeon.co
B·82
Rank #74 of 130 on Modern Reference
CC-BY-ND license + open-access; structured data; broad LLM training-corpus inclusion.
Magazine
The New York Review of Books
nybooks.com
B·78
Rank #95 of 130 on Modern Reference
Metered paywall; LLM corpus partial; long-form widely-cited.
Global rank · Modern Reference
Why these Modern Reference scores
AeonB·82
Modern Reference · 82/100
CC-BY-ND license + open-access; structured data; broad LLM training-corpus inclusion.
The New York Review of BooksB·78
Modern Reference · 78/100
Metered paywall; LLM corpus partial; long-form widely-cited.
Signals behind the Modern Reference score
Aeon
- Creative CommonsOpen license drives broad corpus presence.
The New York Review of Books
- Subscription gateMost articles paywalled with metered free access.
Other dimensions for Aeon vs The New York Review of Books
Other Modern Reference comparisons
Wikipedia (English) vs Encyclopædia BritannicaThe New York Times vs The Washington PostAssociated Press vs ReutersFinancial Times vs The Wall Street JournalNature vs ScienceNew England Journal of Medicine vs The LancetarXiv vs PubMedDOI (CrossRef Resolver) vs Semantic ScholarForeign Affairs vs The EconomistBBC News vs The GuardianAl Jazeera English vs BBC NewsBBC News vs NPR