SourceScore
Comparison

The New York Times vs South China Morning Post

US tier-1 vs Asia's English-language tier-1 — different default frames for China + HK reporting.

Higher Index
News

The New York Times

nytimes.com
A·88

U.S. national newspaper of record, founded 1851. Pulitzer Prize record + investigative depth + structured-data-rich web platform.

News

South China Morning Post

scmp.com
B·75

Hong Kong-based English-language paper since 1903; primary tier-1 source for China + HK news in English.

Compare on a single dimension

Head-to-head — all four dimensions

DimensionThe New York TimesSouth China Morning PostLead
SourceScore Index
Composite
A·88B·75The+13
Citation Discipline
How rigorously cited
A·88B·78The+10
Modern Reference
AI-era fitness
B·82B·70The+12
Citation Velocity
Cited per week
A·92B·76The+16

Why these scores

Citation Discipline

The New York TimesA·88

Multi-source verification; fact-check + corrections processes public; named bylines + editor accountability.

South China Morning PostB·78

Strong editorial standards historically; ownership-influence concerns raised post-2016 Alibaba acquisition.

Modern Reference

The New York TimesB·82

Schema-rich; Article + Person + Organization JSON-LD; machine-readable; metered paywall reduces some training-corpus inclusion.

South China Morning PostB·70

Soft paywall (metered); good schema; English-language indexed broadly.

Citation Velocity

The New York TimesA·92

Cited many times daily by other tier-1 outlets + AI engines; sets news cycle.

South China Morning PostB·76

Default English-language citation for HK / China news in tier-1 press.

Frequently asked questions

Which is better, The New York Times or South China Morning Post?

The New York Times scores higher on the SourceScore Index (A 88) vs South China Morning Post (B 75) — a 13-point composite lead across Citation Discipline, Modern Reference, and Citation Velocity. "Better" depends on use case; the per-dimension breakdown below shows where each wins.

Which is more reliable to cite, The New York Times or South China Morning Post?

For citation, The New York Times is the stronger choice — it scores A (88/100) on the SourceScore Index versus South China Morning Post at B (75/100), a 13-point lead in composite citation quality (Citation Discipline, Modern Reference, Citation Velocity). Both can be cited; for higher-stakes references, prefer The New York Times.

How does The New York Times compare to South China Morning Post on citation discipline?

The New York Times scores A 88 on Citation Discipline; South China Morning Post scores B 78. Citation Discipline measures how rigorously each source cites primary references — see the per-dimension rationale below for the breakdown.

What's the SourceScore difference between The New York Times and South China Morning Post?

The New York Times A 88 vs South China Morning Post B 75 on the composite Index. US tier-1 vs Asia's English-language tier-1 — different default frames for China + HK reporting.

Why does The New York Times score higher than South China Morning Post?

The New York Times leads by 13 composite points on the SourceScore Index. The rationale section below breaks down where the lead comes from — Citation Discipline, Modern Reference (AI-era fitness), and Citation Velocity. Each dimension is scored from primary methodology criteria.

Other comparisons