MODERN REFERENCE · 30% of composite
The New York Times vs ProPublica — Modern Reference
How fit each source is for citation in modern (LLM-era) writing — machine-readability, schema, freshness signals, AI-corpus presence.
Verdict
ProPublica outscores The New York Times on Modern Citation Reference by 2 points (B · 84 vs B · 82).
News
The New York Times
nytimes.com
B·82
Rank #68 of 130 on Modern Reference
Schema-rich; Article + Person + Organization JSON-LD; machine-readable; metered paywall reduces some training-corpus inclusion.
Higher Modern Reference
News
ProPublica
propublica.org
B·84
Rank #61 of 130 on Modern Reference
Open-data ethos = strong LLM corpus presence; data-store pages well-structured.
Global rank · Modern Reference
Why these Modern Reference scores
The New York TimesB·82
Modern Reference · 82/100
Schema-rich; Article + Person + Organization JSON-LD; machine-readable; metered paywall reduces some training-corpus inclusion.
ProPublicaB·84
Modern Reference · 84/100
Open-data ethos = strong LLM corpus presence; data-store pages well-structured.
Signals behind the Modern Reference score
The New York Times
- Paywall meteringSubscription gate; partial corpus availability.
ProPublica
- Data StorePublic datasets + APIs accompanying investigations.
Other dimensions for The New York Times vs ProPublica
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