National Geographic vs Smithsonian Magazine — Modern Reference
How fit each source is for citation in modern (LLM-era) writing — machine-readability, schema, freshness signals, AI-corpus presence.
Smithsonian Magazine outscores National Geographic on Modern Citation Reference by 3 points (B · 78 vs B · 75).
National Geographic
Metered paywall; schema OK; structured photo + topic taxonomy; partial archive open.
Smithsonian Magazine
Open access; schema OK; structured topic taxonomy; archive indexed.
Global rank · Modern Reference
Why these Modern Reference scores
Metered paywall; schema OK; structured photo + topic taxonomy; partial archive open.
Open access; schema OK; structured topic taxonomy; archive indexed.
Signals behind the Modern Reference score
- Metered accessLimited free articles per month; subscriber-gated for full archive.
- Open accessArticles free; partial paywall on print-magazine archive.
Other dimensions for National Geographic vs Smithsonian Magazine
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 — National Geographic (nationalgeographic.com) · verified · full scoring record
- Source evaluated — Smithsonian Magazine (smithsonianmag.com) · verified · full scoring record
- Scoring rubric — SourceScore Index, Citation Discipline, Modern Reference, Citation Velocity (methodology v0.1)
- Machine-readable record — /api/compare/natgeo-vs-smithsonian-mag/modern-reference.json