For two decades, Google embodied the promise of a structured web: a search engine, millions of creators, an implicit exchange. Produce useful content, and Google will send you traffic. This mechanics fueled thousands of blogs, independent media and editorial SMEs. But since the arrival of the summaries generated by artificial intelligence, called Ai Overviewsthe promise crumbles. And for some, it collapses.
A breathless model
Since March 2024, niche publishers as Charleston Crafted Or The Planet D have seen their traffic drop from 70 to 90 %. Their advertising income collapsed, their teams reduced, and some have ceased all activity. In question, a discreet but brutal revolution: Google now extracts most of their content to respond directly to the Internet user, without requiring click. The user is satisfied; The Creator, forgotten.
This change is not a simple algorithmic adjustment. It translates a model switch. Google is no longer an audience vector. It becomes an information window with closed counters. For the user, time saving is real. For the publisher, the link with its audience is broken.
The click becomes optional, then accessory
Similarweb and Semrush data confirm a massive trend: the prints remain stable, but clicks plumme. The user reads the synthetic response at the top of the page, then leaves. The page visited has no transactional value. The content exists without generating income. What has long been the unit of measurement of editorial profitability – the click – is disabled.
Summaries are not alone in question. Google also revalues content from forums like Reddit or Quora, deemed more “authentic”. This rebalancing is done at the expense of specialized sites, including those that scrupulously respect Google’s instructions on expertise (EEAT).
Is a web without publishers tenable?
The stake exceeds the sole economy of creators. If the independent sites close one after the other, Google depletes its own raw material. Because AI does not generate anything: it synthesizes what it finds. However, by siphoning content without fair redistribution, Google erodes the sources that feed its answers.
Some scenarios are emerging: concentration of content on some proprietary platforms (YouTube, Wikipedia, Tripadvisor), explosion of automated content with low value, standardization of responses. The editorial diversity, which was wealth of the web, is reduced.
Dependence on a single actor
Google is not alone in question. The situation recalls the successive crises that publishers have known with Facebook, Amazon or Tiktok. Each time, the intermediary becomes an essential point of entry, then modifies the rules of the game. But Google retains a particular role: it presents itself as the index of the web. If the index stops sending readers, then it becomes a value extractor, not a distributor.
The absence of transparency aggravates the imbalance. Publishers do not know when their content is used or under what conditions. No compensation is provided. No visibility guarantee is given. The engine is opaque, the impact, brutal.
And after?
For publishers, the conclusion is clear: Google is no longer a growth strategy. At best, it is a secondary channel. At worst, toxic dependence. Some test other channels: Newsletter, YouTube, Discord, Owner Applications. Others negotiate collectively, as raptive with its 5,700 creators. But rebalancing is uncertain.
If Google continues its trajectory, it could become an information platform without publishers, or almost. An AI that recites fragments of a deserted web, where human voices will be killed for lack of readers. The risk is no longer hypothetical. He is underway.
