Publishers consider opting out of Google as search traffic declines
Posted by giuliomagnifico 1 day ago
Comments
Comment by asar 1 day ago
I'm really not a fan of regulation, but someone has to step in and have Google seperate its products, search should be free of AI overviews imo.
Comment by suburban_strike 1 day ago
Google is delivering a solution to a problem they [indirectly?] created.
Comment by dzonga 1 day ago
llm crawlers - all they do is take. they craw your content. then give it to users in distilled form in the form of 'A.I overview' or summarized content.
incentives to contribute are gone genuine original content are gone. soon enough majority of the content will be llm generated, it not already.
the original content will either be in closed communities e.g discord, mailing lists. hence 'local'
maybe video will survive but text/images - no.
Comment by rickydroll 1 day ago
Closed communities are not a viable alternative as their content has an even lower signal-to-noise ratio than AI-generated summaries. I have spent hours trying to piece together a reasonable set of answers from shitty searches on various forums and mailing lists. I'll take AI summaries any day over the crap that you can get from forums.
Comment by spwa4 1 day ago
At this point, this will simply destroy publishers' business entirely. Which won't stop some of them, but the rest will see what happens and run back to Google.
(needed for identification to fill out online taxes which is the only option left)
Comment by frizlab 1 day ago
Comment by spwa4 1 day ago
Comment by RiverCrochet 1 day ago
These days, if you have an Android phone and/or are part of the Google ecosystem, Google services overall are very useful for things like "find restaurant near me", etc or finding places to buy stuff, etc. But for intellectual pursuits or the idea "the portal to the open web", Google Search has been dead a long time.
It's been very rare for many years now that I enter anything into Google search that isn't generic information that I can find by searching Wikipedia or even using ChatGPT and I'll typically use those directly instead.
So it's rational and expected for publishers to do this. Google Search provides fewer and fewer benefits over time.
Comment by CM30 1 day ago
Also RIP anyone who likes doing their own research I suppose. I've always found it useful to compare different publications' coverage of a trending story when trying to figure out what the true story is here, and that feels like it'll only get significantly more difficult to do if everyone ops out of Google or other search engines.
Comment by 1970-01-01 1 day ago
Comment by mcphage 1 day ago
Comment by rickydroll 1 day ago
Okay, apart from that snarky retort, what discovery mechanism are they going to use to drive people to their human-generated slop?
Comment by watwut 1 day ago
Comment by rickydroll 1 day ago
Comment by watwut 1 day ago
In both a. and b., they are not discoverable through google. So, not provinding free labor makes sense. Either they find a new channel or stop publishing ... but if they are NOT on google, people may end up lookin for stuff elsewhere. If they are on google, they are guaranteed to not find them
Comment by rickydroll 1 day ago
Comment by watwut 23 hours ago
I like the era of open internet where people who knew stuff had blogs you could find and read. That era ended when google started to require a lot of SEO to just find things. It will be over and that is it.
Comment by phendrenad2 1 day ago
Comment by whyage 1 day ago
Comment by CrzyLngPwd 1 day ago
It was clear that eventually someone would decide to stop these parasites like google from accessing their content.
Good for them.
Comment by TheqO 1 day ago