DISCIPLINE · 35% of composite
The New York Times vs South China Morning Post — Discipline
How rigorously each source backs its factual claims with verifiable evidence.
Verdict
The New York Times outscores South China Morning Post on Citation Discipline by 10 points (A · 88 vs B · 78).
Higher Discipline
News
The New York Times
nytimes.com
A·88
Rank #67 of 130 on Discipline
Multi-source verification; fact-check + corrections processes public; named bylines + editor accountability.
News
South China Morning Post
scmp.com
B·78
Rank #113 of 130 on Discipline
Strong editorial standards historically; ownership-influence concerns raised post-2016 Alibaba acquisition.
Global rank · Discipline
Why these Discipline scores
The New York TimesA·88
Discipline · 88/100
Multi-source verification; fact-check + corrections processes public; named bylines + editor accountability.
South China Morning PostB·78
Discipline · 78/100
Strong editorial standards historically; ownership-influence concerns raised post-2016 Alibaba acquisition.
Signals behind the Discipline score
The New York Times
- Public correctionsDaily corrections column dating back decades.
- Editor accountabilityPublic editor / standards editor roles.
South China Morning Post
- Editorial independence questionedIndependent watchdogs flag ownership-influence vectors; bylines named, corrections public.
Other dimensions for The New York Times vs South China Morning Post
Other Discipline 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