“Links were the last redeeming quality of search that gave publishers traffic and revenue. Now Google just takes content by force... The definition of theft.”
— Daniel Coffey, News Media Alliance
They told us the future would be digital.
They didn’t tell us it might also be disposable.
Print is dead, they said. TV is dying. And now, online journalism—the last bastion of real-time, widely shared, deeply reported media—may be flatlining in plain sight. And strangely, it’s not Facebook or Twitter this time.
It’s your friendly neighborhood AI chatbot.
The Rise of AI, The Fall of Traffic
In case you missed it, Google’s AI Overviews now offers users a slick, summarized version of what they’re searching for—right at the top of the page. It pulls this info from various websites, which get no compensation and, often, no clicks either.
Why scroll down and click when a neat little blurb already answers your question?
Here’s what that means in numbers:
-
In the past decade, global ad revenue has doubled to $1 trillion.
-
Yet, Google’s referral ratio dropped from 6:1 to 18:1—that is, for every 18 pieces of information Google takes, it sends back just 1 visitor.
-
OpenAI's ratio? 1,500:1 .
-
Anthropic? A mind-bending 60,000:1.
(All stats cited from Cloudflare’s CEO.)
As Claudia Jenska of the Tow Center for Digital Journalism told France 24’s program Scoop, this isn’t just some annoying shift in SEO strategy. This is an existential threat to the very foundation of how journalism pays for itself.
Google Zero: The Cliff Edge
“Google Zero” is the term that haunts newsrooms now. Coined by Neil Patel, it refers to the point where Google no longer sends users to third-party websites. Instead, everything stays in Google’s sandbox—summarized, packaged, frictionless. But also source-less, context-less, and potentially fact-less.
Why would you click a HuffPost article when the summary already “tells” you what’s inside?
Except, sometimes it doesn’t.
According to Jenska’s research, AI summaries can be flat-out wrong. They hallucinate. They invent links. They serve plagiarized content. And even when users do want to click through, the links may not lead to original reporting at all.
The illusion of certainty is powerful. But it’s built on shaky, borrowed scaffolding.
The Last Three Options: Deal, Sue, or Hide
So what’s a struggling newsroom to do?
-
Cut a deal with AI firms—licensing content in exchange for compensation (like Le Monde with OpenAI, or AFP with Mistral).
-
Sue for copyright infringement (which some already have in the U.S., Canada, and India).
-
Or try to block AI crawlers using the robot exclusion protocol. But that’s not legally binding—and many AI companies reportedly ignore it anyway.
And if you don’t sign a deal?
Some early evidence suggests your content might get buried even deeper by AI tools—while those with licensing deals are prioritized.
We’ve entered a new kind of SEO war: not for Google rank, but for AI visibility. And most publishers are flying blind.
The Parasite Problem No One Wants to Say Out Loud
There’s an irony here. The very AI tools cannibalizing journalism depend on journalism to exist.
If newsrooms die out, chatbots lose their food source.
No new stories. No fresh data.
Just recycled drivel and outdated summaries of yesterday’s internet.
Which is why Jenska offers a final plea: AI companies need to recognize the real value of human journalism—not just exploit it.
“I would love to see more transparency from AI companies about how they choose media partners, and greater recognition of the value of human-reported journalistic content.”
Amen to that.
Source and Credit
This post is based on France 24’s brilliant episode of Scoop, featuring Claudia Jenska of the Tow Center. Watch the full episode here:
📺 France 24: “Scoop - Is AI killing journalism?”
Post a Comment