From Articles to Publishers: Aggregating Language Model Predictions for News Source Reliability Inference

Content-based detection of unreliable news is increasingly difficult, as low-reliability sources mimic credible journalism and generative AI makes fabricated content harder to flag. We ask whether network structure can improve news reliability classification, taking a domain-level approach that shifts the focus from individual articles to source reliability. From URL-sharing patterns in Telegram chats, we build a statistically validated domain co-sharing network and find assortative mixing by reliability: low-reliability domains group together, as do reliable ones. Exploiting this structure, we compare Graph Neural Networks against network-unaware baselines using both content-aware features (multilingual text embeddings) and content-agnostic features (spreading dynamics). GNNs consistently outperform Multi-Layer Perceptrons on identical features, with GraphSAGE best in both settings (accuracy 0.63 with content, 0.53 without), a 13-14% relative gain over the network-unaware baseline. Network topology thus systematically improves domain reliability assessment, and remains effective even when content analysis is infeasible.

Vision-language models (VLMs) increasingly read news and web content as images, where the publisher's identity is visually present. We show that VLMs carry a strong source-credibility prior keyed on outlet identity, and study it along three axes. (i) Cross-model benchmark. We introduce CueTrust, a cross-model diagnostic that measures which surface source cue overrides an article's content evidence via a Source-Override Index (SOI). Across seven VLMs and five cues, the vulnerability profile is model- and scale-dependent, and the override is outlet-identity-specific and encoding-invariant, firing from the masthead name, the logo image, or the bare domain, but not from a named author, in-text authority, or page layout (clean negative controls). (ii) Mechanistic account. For the brand cue, we give a full mechanistic account: swapping only the masthead moves credibility across an approximately 11 log-odds range that tracks professional ratings (rho = 0.88 with Media Bias/Fact Check). The prior is dual-coded (name and logo), strengthens with scale, is causally formed at layers 19-21, carried by interpretable seed-stable sparse-autoencoder features, and recurs at the same relative locus in a second model family. It overrides content (about 1.8x) as a signal-magnitude effect within a shared pathway, not a privileged route. Steering the localized direction selectively reduces the override (41% reduction) and generalizes to held-out outlets, confirming the prior is causally used, not merely decodable. Deployed VLMs may thus defer to source identity over the evidence in front of them, a reliability failure we can measure across models, localize, and causally probe. We release the stimulus suite and CueTrust.

LLM-as-judge frameworks are increasingly used for automatic NLG evaluation, yet their per-instance reliability remains poorly understood. We present a two-pronged diagnostic toolkit applied to SummEval: $\textbf{(1)}$ a transitivity analysis that reveals widespread per-input inconsistency masked by low aggregate violation rates ($\barρ = 0.8$-$4.1\%$), with $33$-$67\%$ of documents exhibiting at least one directed 3-cycle; and $\textbf{(2)}$ split conformal prediction sets over 1-5 Likert scores providing theoretically-guaranteed $\geq(1{-}α)$ coverage, with set width serving as a per-instance reliability indicator ($r_s = {+}0.576$, $N{=}1{,}918$, $p < 10^{-100}$, pooled across all judges). Critically, prediction set width shows consistent cross-judge agreement ($\bar{r} = 0.32$-$0.38$), demonstrating it captures document-level difficulty rather than judge-specific noise. Across four judges and four criteria, both diagnostics converge: criterion matters more than judge, with relevance judged most reliably (avg. set size $\approx 3.0$) and coherence moderately so (avg. set size $\approx 3.9$), while fluency and consistency remain unreliable (avg. set size $\approx 4.9$). We release all code, prompts, and cached results.