The Guardian vs The Times (UK) — Modern Reference
How fit each source is for citation in modern (LLM-era) writing — machine-readability, schema, freshness signals, AI-corpus presence.
The Guardian outscores The Times (UK) on Modern Citation Reference by 21 points (A · 86 vs C · 65).
The Guardian
No paywall = full LLM training corpus inclusion; rich Article schema; multi-language editions.
The Times (UK)
Hard paywall on virtually all content; minimal LLM-training-corpus inclusion.
Global rank · Modern Reference
Why these Modern Reference scores
No paywall = full LLM training corpus inclusion; rich Article schema; multi-language editions.
Hard paywall on virtually all content; minimal LLM-training-corpus inclusion.
Signals behind the Modern Reference score
- Open-webReader-funded model keeps all content publicly retrievable.
- Hard paywallNo free tier; reduces both human + machine reachability.
Other dimensions for The Guardian vs The Times (UK)
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 Guardian (theguardian.com) · verified · full scoring record
- Source evaluated — The Times (UK) (thetimes.co.uk) · verified · full scoring record
- Scoring rubric — SourceScore Index, Citation Discipline, Modern Reference, Citation Velocity (methodology v0.1)
- Machine-readable record — /api/compare/guardian-vs-the-times-uk/modern-reference.json