Publishers Demand 'AI Overview' Traffic Stats from Google, Alleging 'Forced' Deals (theguardian.com)
- Reference: 0179069484
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/25/09/07/184203/publishers-demand-ai-overview-traffic-stats-from-google-alleging-forced-deals
- Source link: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2025/sep/06/existential-crisis-google-use-ai-search-upended-web-publishers-models
> Publishers — already under financial pressure from soaring costs, falling advertising revenues, the decline of print and the wider trend of readers turning away from news — argue that they are effectively being forced by Google to either accept deals, including on how content is used in AI Overview and AI Mode, or "drop out of all search results", according to several sources... In recent years, Google Discover, which feeds users articles and videos tailored to them based on their past online activity, has replaced search as the main source of click-throughs to content. However, David Buttle, founder of the consultancy DJB Strategies, says the service, which is also tied to publishers' overall search deals, does not deliver the quality traffic that most publishers need to drive their long-term strategies. "Google Discover is of zero product importance to Google at all," he says. "It allows Google to funnel more traffic to publishers as traffic from search declines ... Publishers have no choice but to agree or lose their organic search. It also tends to reward clickbaity type content. It pulls in the opposite direction to the kind of relationship publishers want."
>
> Meanwhile, publishers are fighting a wider battle with AI companies seeking to plunder their content to train their large language models. The creative industry is intensively lobbying the government to ensure that proposed legislation does not allow AI firms to use copyright-protected work without permission, a move that would stop the "value being scraped" out of the £125bn sector. Some publishers have struck bilateral licensing deals with AI companies — such as the FT, the German media group Axel Springer, the Guardian and the Nordic publisher Schibsted with the ChatGPT maker OpenAI — while others such as the BBC have taken action against AI companies alleging copyright theft. "It is a two-pronged attack on publishers, a sort of pincer movement," says Chris Duncan, a former News UK and Bauer Media senior executive who now runs a media consultancy, Seedelta. "Content is disappearing into AI products without serious remuneration, while AI summaries are being integrated into products so there is no need to click through, effectively taking money from both ends. It is an existential crisis."
"At the moment the AI and tech community are showing no signs of supporting publisher revenue," says the chief executive of the UK's Periodical Publishers Association...
[1] https://www.theguardian.com/media/2025/sep/06/existential-crisis-google-use-ai-search-upended-web-publishers-models
It's a denial of service (Score:2)
AI model builders will just delay longer and longer knowing that those depending on click advertising revenue, book sales, music sales, etc. will either go out of business or settle for a much lower amount.
The question of AI model arms race for future self-defense and battlefield tactic will keep the government busy during this time while the licensing and royalty payments are figured out.
Equitable Treatment (Score:2)
I suggest that any publisher's website (like Google's search results) with a webpage featuring content that is the primary result of the page (featured top of page content) or constitutes 50% or more of the result as summaries of original published news or research articles remunerate the originator of the content proportional to the amount of text published relative to the amount of text in the source publication. The rate of that remuneration can be decided by negotiation between representatives of the c
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, I would grant fair use exemptions as provided by law for such use as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Again, lawyers, publishers and elected officials can hash out the lines between limited quoting as fair use and content theft.
Daily Mail (Score:5, Funny)
> AI Overviews have lowered click-through traffic to Daily Mail sites by as much as 89%, the publisher told a UK government body that regulates competition.
Finally a killer app for AI.
What if.... (Score:2)
I'm not suggesting this would ever happen.....but.....
What if Google and other major search providers decided to not index or provide search results for any "news" sites at all, and constrained their results to "non-news" sites. Just suppose, for a moment, that happened.
Would news sites still bitch?
Would various "do gooder" 3rd parties still bitch? ...and would they demand Google (and the like) resume their previous activity?
Would traffic to news sites plummet into the abyss (aka, would most people stop goi
Roll their own (Score:2)
What if the major news sites were to cut Google (and the like) off, preventing them from indexing their news sites, and introduced their own dedicated news search site? If they were successful, what then?
Suppose the new news only search engine were called "NewsCo", just to have a name to refer to, and run by a jointly owned (by publishers) company of that name.
If advertisers wanted to reach news site readers, they would have to deal with NewsCo.
NewsCo could go ahead and provide AI summaries, not worrying if
News entertainment sites are the bane of society. (Score:2)
Of course AI will tend to ignore new entertainment websites. While often more truthful than some will admit, the format tends to regularly bend reporting for profits, corporate needs.
Re: (Score:2)
> While often more truthful than some will admit, the format tends to regularly bend reporting for profits, corporate needs.
Well, since they are entertainment websites they will make the content entertaining, right? And that implies writing it with a spin. Identifying your content as humor (legally, as parody) implies this spin, makes it social commentary, and by law grants it an exemption to infringement and defamation cases.