The New York Times vs South China Morning Post — Modern Reference
How fit each source is for citation in modern (LLM-era) writing — machine-readability, schema, freshness signals, AI-corpus presence.
The New York Times outscores South China Morning Post on Modern Citation Reference by 12 points (B · 82 vs B · 70).
The New York Times
Schema-rich; Article + Person + Organization JSON-LD; machine-readable; metered paywall reduces some training-corpus inclusion.
South China Morning Post
Soft paywall (metered); good schema; English-language indexed broadly.
Global rank · Modern Reference
Why these Modern Reference scores
Schema-rich; Article + Person + Organization JSON-LD; machine-readable; metered paywall reduces some training-corpus inclusion.
Soft paywall (metered); good schema; English-language indexed broadly.
Signals behind the Modern Reference score
- Paywall meteringSubscription gate; partial corpus availability.
- Metered accessMost articles readable without subscription up to monthly cap.
Other dimensions for The New York Times vs South China Morning Post
Other Modern Reference comparisons
Sources & references
Every score on this page is read from the two publications below and graded against the published rubric. No score is bought, estimated or supplied by the source being scored.
- Source evaluated — The New York Times (nytimes.com) · verified · full scoring record
- Source evaluated — South China Morning Post (scmp.com) · verified · full scoring record
- Scoring rubric — SourceScore Index, Citation Discipline, Modern Reference, Citation Velocity (methodology v0.1)
- Machine-readable record — /api/compare/nyt-vs-scmp/modern-reference.json