MODERN REFERENCE · 30% of composite
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.
Verdict
The New York Times outscores South China Morning Post on Modern Citation Reference by 12 points (B · 82 vs B · 70).
Higher Modern Reference
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.
News
South China Morning Post
scmp.com
B·70
Rank #115 of 130 on Modern Reference
Soft paywall (metered); good schema; English-language indexed broadly.
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.
South China Morning PostB·70
Modern Reference · 70/100
Soft paywall (metered); good schema; English-language indexed broadly.
Signals behind the Modern Reference score
The New York Times
- Paywall meteringSubscription gate; partial corpus availability.
South China Morning Post
- 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
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