Google Defends AI Search Amid Publisher Traffic Collapse

Google has pushed back against growing concerns that its AI-powered search features are harming traffic to publishers’ websites, asserting in a blog post that overall organic click volume from its search engine has remained “relatively stable” year-over-year. Liz Reid, Google’s VP and Head of Search, argues that third-party reports claiming dramatic traffic declines are based on flawed methodologies, isolated cases, or trends predating the rollout of AI features like AI Overviews and the AI chatbot in Search. Despite Google’s assurances, numerous studies and media reports paint a different picture. A recent analysis by Similarweb shows that the percentage of news searches resulting in zero clicks to news websites rose from 56% in May 2024 to 69% by May 2025—suggesting a sharp drop in publishers’ visibility. Outlets like Business Insider, The Washington Post, and HuffPost have reported significant traffic declines, leading to staff cuts and internal restructuring. These trends have fueled widespread anxiety in the digital media industry, with many blaming AI summaries that appear at the top of search results for siphoning attention away from original content. Google acknowledges that traffic patterns are shifting—“decreased traffic to some sites and increased traffic to others”—but stops short of disclosing how many sites are affected or which types are gaining or losing. Instead, it emphasizes that “click quality” has improved, meaning users who do click through from AI Overviews tend to stay longer on sites, indicating deeper engagement. Google defines a “quality click” as one where users don’t immediately return to the search page, suggesting that AI may be guiding users to more relevant, in-depth content. Reid argues that AI is not killing search but transforming it, pointing out that AI Overviews now display more links than before, increasing opportunities for websites to be discovered. She claims that users are increasingly drawn to sites offering authentic voices, forums, videos, podcasts, and original analysis—content that AI can summarize but not fully replicate. This shift, she says, reflects a broader trend where users seek richer, more personal experiences online. However, Google’s own actions suggest it recognizes the problem. The company has long struggled with users bypassing Google entirely for tasks like shopping (turning to Amazon) or discovering content (turning to TikTok and Instagram). In response, Google has introduced features like a “Reddit” filter (now labeled “forums”) and expanded Google Shopping with tools like local inventory checks and image-based product searches—efforts to reclaim user attention. Moreover, Google is now promoting new tools for publishers to monetize traffic beyond traditional ads, such as micropayments and newsletter sign-ups, signaling that it expects continued pressure on ad-driven revenue models. While Google insists that billions of clicks still flow to websites daily, its focus on “click quality” over raw volume feels like a strategic reframe. The company is trying to shift the narrative from “AI is stealing traffic” to “AI is directing better traffic.” But for publishers already facing steep declines, the distinction may not matter—especially when the data from real-world performance continues to show fewer clicks, lower visibility, and shrinking audiences. Ultimately, Google’s claim of stable traffic may be true in aggregate, but it masks a significant redistribution of attention. The real issue isn’t just AI—it’s the broader erosion of Google’s central role in online discovery, accelerated by social media, AI, and user behavior changes. Google’s pushback may soothe some concerns, but it doesn’t change the fact that many publishers are struggling to survive in the new digital landscape.