Google says AI in Search is good for publishers, but I’m dubious

Ever since Google fully embraced generative AI in its main search results with AI Overviews and AI Mode, there has been a massive, looming question for those of us who create content on the web: what is this going to do to our traffic? As publishers, we’re obviously concerned about a future where Google’s AI just gives users the answer, removing the need to click through to the websites that provide that information in the first place.

Well, Google has now published a blog post to address this very concern, and their message is clear: they believe AI in Search is actually a good thing for the web ecosystem. And while it’s encouraging to hear that they are aware of and thinking about this potential issue, you’ll have to forgive me if I remain a bit dubious.

What Google is saying

In a post by Liz Reid, the VP and Head of Google Search, Google contends that AI in Search is actually driving more queries and higher quality clicks to websites. They argue that while overall click volume has been stable, the quality of those clicks has increased. The idea is that an AI response might give users the “lay of the land,” but for many questions, people still want to dive deeper; and when they do, those clicks are from more engaged, valuable users.

They also make a point that has been central to our concerns:

As a search company, we care passionately — perhaps more than any other company — about the health of the web ecosystem. We continue to send billions of clicks to websites every day and believe that Search’s value exchange with the web remains strong.

It’s good to hear them say they are concerned for the health of the overall web out loud, honestly. They also emphasize that their AI experiences are built to highlight the web with prominent links and citations, not to replace it.

A slippery slope

That all sounds great, but my skepticism still creeps in. As a publisher, our ability to continue operating, to pay the bills, and to create the very content that Google’s AI needs to function, is directly tied to the traffic we receive from Search.

While Google’s data may show stable traffic for now, it’s hard to ignore the long-term, slippery slope it feels like we’re on. If AI Overviews get better and better at answering more complex questions directly on the search results page, the user’s incentive to click through to a source website will naturally decrease over time. I’d be lying if I told you I don’t utilize it myself.

It’s a classic chicken/egg problem: if publishers can’t get enough traffic to make a living, they will have to stop creating the high-quality, in-depth, and authentic content that the AI itself relies on. Without a healthy and profitable ecosystem of creators, the AI’s well of information will eventually run dry, or be filled with nothing but AI-generated summaries of other AI-generated summaries.

So, while I’m genuinely glad that Google is publicly stating its commitment to the health of the web, the fundamental conflict remains. It’s encouraging that they are at least aware of the delicate balance they need to strike, but the proof will be in the pudding. Keeping AI in Search in a position that is uniquely helpful for both the users and content creators is no small task. I sure hope they’re up for it in the long run.