Subject Matter Expertise Matters - Topic Citations
Topic ID: 95
Every citation has two independent 0-100 scores. The source Reliability score rates the general reliability of the outlet itself, regardless of the specific claim, based on an eight-tier scale running from primary government and international scientific bodies (CDC, WHO, NASA, IPCC) at the top, through peer-reviewed journals, wire services, mainstream science journalism, and advocacy organizations, down to tertiary references like Wikipedia and unverifiable or absent sources at the bottom.
The Accuracy score, by contrast, rates how well a specific citation supports topic statements — a citation from an excellent source can score low if misapplied or can score high if it precisely backs up topic statements.
JD Vances "MAHA Summit" Remarks - Event Context and Substance
- STAT NewsCreatine-filled swag bags and an embrace from Vance: MAHA marks its ascendance in Trump's WashingtonReliability score: 82 | Accuracy score: 88
- STAT NewsReliability score: 82 | Accuracy score: 88
False Balance (Elevating Fringe Voices to Expert-Level Credibility) Manufactures the Appearance of Scientific Controversy
- WikipediaReliability score: 55 | Accuracy score: 92
- WikipediaReliability score: 55 | Accuracy score: 92
Full Context of Vances Remarks on Scientific Dissent and ""Silencing""
- Rev.comReliability score: 65 | Accuracy score: 88
- Rev.comReliability score: 65 | Accuracy score: 88
Research: Balanced Media Coverage of Contrarian Views Undermines Public Understanding of Consensus
- John Cook (Research PDF)Reliability score: 65 | Accuracy score: 92
- John Cook (Research PDF)Reliability score: 65 | Accuracy score: 92