Independent media outlets have lodged a formal complaint with the EU against Google’s AI Overview search feature, claiming it misappropriates content and causes significant traffic and revenue losses, sparking renewed regulatory scrutiny in Europe and the UK.
Report: Antitrust Complaints Against Google Arise Over AI-Driven Search Summaries Impacting Media Traffic
Introduction
A significant antitrust challenge has emerged against Google concerning its AI-enhanced search service known as ‘AI Overview’, which summarises search results using artificial intelligence (AI) at the top of the results page. Several independent media outlets have alleged that this service is adversely affecting their website traffic and revenues, prompting a formal complaint to the European Union (EU) Commission accusing Google of abusing market dominance and misusing media content [1].
Claims of Media Traffic Decline and Content Usage
According to the complaint brought by a coalition of independent publishers, the AI Overview leads to “serious harm including traffic decline, reader attrition, and revenue loss”. The central contention is that Google uses media articles as the foundation for its AI summaries without explicit consent or compensation. Publishers assert that participation in Google’s regular search results is conditional upon implicitly allowing Google to use their content for training its large language models (LLMs). Refusal would, they claim, exclude them from Google’s search listings, effectively coercing use of their content [1].
This issue reflects wider concerns about AI models leveraging third-party content, where content creators are unsure about their rights or how to protect them from exploitation, especially when access to Google’s dominant search platform is a core traffic source.
Legal Actions and Involved Parties
The complaint is reportedly filed with the EU Commission by an undisclosed group of independent media outlets, supported by organisations such as the Movement for an Open Web—a coalition of digital advertisers and media companies—and the human rights nonprofit Foxglove. Foxglove’s Executive Director, Rosa Curling, has described Google’s AI Overview as an existential threat to independent journalism, urging regulators to enable an opt-out mechanism for publishers to exclude their content from AI training datasets [1].
Similar concerns have prompted regulatory complaints in the United Kingdom, highlighting the transnational nature of this dispute.
Regulatory Responses and Market Implications
The UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) is actively considering measures that may affect Google’s search operations. On 24 June 2025, the CMA announced exploring designation of Google’s search service as holding “Strategic Market Status” (SMS). Such designation would empower the CMA to impose competition-promoting requirements, potentially mandating structural or operational changes affecting AI features like the Overview. A final decision is expected in October 2025 after consultations, including discussions with Google [1].
The UK’s News Media Association welcomed the CMA’s considerations, emphasising the lack of control media companies have over Google’s reuse of their news content through AI summaries. They called for robust regulatory interventions to address what they describe as Google’s unfair monopoly [1].
Quantitative Evidence of Impact
Independent data analysed by SimilarWeb, as reported by US media Axios in April 2025, indicates a notable decline in search-driven traffic to major US media outlets coinciding with Google’s AI Overview launch in May 2024. Average monthly visits to the top 500 US news sites have decreased from approximately 5.3 million per site in May 2024 to 4.5 million in February 2025, implicating the AI feature in reducing direct traffic to publishers [1].
This data complements media claims about direct economic harm and provides some empirical basis for regulatory scrutiny and legal action.
Context and Expert Perspectives
Prior coverage and expert commentary suggest growing apprehension in the publishing industry about the potential for AI-powered search tools to disrupt traditional traffic models and revenue streams. There have been warnings from former Google executives regarding risks faced by publishers if Google’s ecosystem is broken up or overregulated, highlighting the complexity of balancing innovation and fair market practices [4].
Moreover, other lawsuits targeting Google’s use of AI previews have been filed, indicating a broader pattern of legal challenges to Google’s AI implementations in search and information presentation [7].
Conclusion
The filing of antitrust complaints against Google over its AI Overview search summaries marks a significant escalation in tensions between independent media outlets and the dominant search engine. Publishers claim that Google’s AI-driven summarisation tools diminish their web traffic and revenue by repurposing content without adequate consent or compensation, leading to calls for regulatory intervention and options to exclude their content from AI training.
Regulators in the EU and UK appear responsive, considering measures that could impose competition-enhancing obligations on Google. Available data points to real declines in media traffic aligning with the AI Overview introduction, lending some weight to publisher concerns.
While Google’s precise responses and any eventual regulatory outcomes remain to be seen, the dispute highlights critical questions about the intersection of AI technologies, content rights, and market power in digital media distribution—issues of ongoing global relevance to policymakers, media companies, and consumers alike.
References
References to reported developments and claims are based on the lead article [1] and verified related sources [2], [7], and contextual background from [4].
- https://www.mediatoday.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=327396 – Please view link – unable to able to access data
- https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/googles-ai-overviews-hit-by-eu-antitrust-complaint-independent-publishers-2025-07-04/ – A group of independent publishers has filed an antitrust complaint with the European Commission against Google’s AI Overviews, alleging market abuse. The complaint, submitted by the Independent Publishers Alliance and supported by groups like the Movement for an Open Web and Foxglove Legal, claims Google’s AI-generated summaries, which appear at the top of search results, harm publishers by diverting traffic and revenue. These summaries are created using publisher content without offering an opt-out option without penalizing visibility on search results. The groups argue this practice threatens independent journalism and have requested an interim measure to prevent further harm. Google defends the AI Overviews feature, claiming it drives billions of daily clicks and new opportunities for content discovery, and claims that traffic fluctuations depend on various factors, including seasonal demand and algorithm updates. The UK’s Competition and Markets Authority is also reviewing the complaint, which parallels a U.S. lawsuit alleging similar damage to publishers. The case highlights growing concern over Google’s integration of AI in search and its impact on news media and content rights.
- https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/google-offers-new-proposal-stave-off-eu-antitrust-fine-document-shows-2025-07-02/ – Google has submitted a new proposal to the European Commission to address antitrust concerns under the EU’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) and potentially avoid another significant fine. Following March charges accusing the tech giant of favoring its own services like Google Shopping, Hotels, and Flights in search results, Google is offering changes to make search results more equitable for competitors. The latest proposal, known as ‘Option B,’ suggests adding a box to Google Search containing free links to direct service providers like hotels, restaurants, airlines, and travel services. This would be displayed beneath another box for vertical search services (VSS), which includes links to specialized search engines. This measure is intended to give non-Google services greater visibility and opportunities without the appearance of Google favoring its own platforms. A workshop with the European Commission and competitors is scheduled for July 7-8 in Brussels to discuss the proposal. Google has warned of negative impacts on user experience due to some DMA requirements, but remains committed to compliance. Failure to comply with the DMA could result in fines up to 10% of Google’s global annual revenue.
- https://www.techradar.com/pro/a-huge-blow-to-publishers-and-media-former-google-exec-warns-about-dangers-of-breaking-google-in-explosive-new-book – In his new book ‘Yield: How Google Bought, Built, and Bullied Its Way to Advertising Dominance,’ Ari Paparo, a former Google executive, delivers a critical insider look at Google’s monopolistic behavior in the advertising technology sector. He illustrates how Google achieved dominance through strategic acquisitions, positioning itself as both the buyer and seller of display ads, often extracting profits at the expense of publishers and rivals. The book underscores serious concerns over Google’s unilateral control, such as changes to ad pricing tools that negatively impacted publishers like News Corp and Gannett. With Google controlling 90% of the publisher ad serving market, antitrust scrutiny has intensified. Although dismantling Google could open opportunities for rivals like Facebook and TikTok, Paparo warns that breaking up the company might harm publishers reliant on its ad revenue. The evolving digital landscape, driven by AI and changing user behaviors, further complicates the future of Google’s advertising ecosystem. As the company leans into its AI-powered ad buying and platforms like YouTube, the next few years could profoundly transform or destabilize the open web advertising space, depending on regulatory actions and market responses.
- https://www.ft.com/content/2b78019f-dc5b-4c59-897d-e90406898fe6 – In this opinion piece, a Nobel Prize-winning MIT economics professor advocates for Europe to follow the U.S. lead in taking strong antitrust actions against Google. The article argues that decades of regulatory failure have allowed tech giants like Google, Amazon, and Apple to monopolize markets and gain immense power, undermining innovation, competition, and democratic institutions. A recent U.S. court ruling found Google guilty of monopolizing digital advertising, a market worth $876 billion, which the author compares to a financial firm owning a central stock exchange. This dominance has harmed independent journalism by siphoning advertising revenue and skewing the digital marketplace. The professor calls on the EU to build upon its Digital Markets and Digital Services Acts and take bold steps beyond fines—including potentially breaking up monopolies—to restore competitive balance. He proposes a 50% tax on digital ad revenues above $500 million to curb dominance and incentivize fair competition. Highlighting bipartisan U.S. support for antitrust reforms, the author urges Europe to assert democratic control over the digital economy and prevent tech oligarchs from determining the rules of engagement.
- https://apnews.com/article/9d21f90333f6a4d8907b81231b32c82f – The U.S. Department of Justice and Google presented their closing arguments in a case accusing Google of monopolizing online advertising technology. U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema will decide if Google engaged in monopolistic conduct and could force Google to sell parts of its ad tech business. The Justice Department claims Google illegally maintains a monopoly in ‘open-web display advertising,’ controlling significant market shares with products like DoubleClick and Google Ads. Google’s defense argues the government’s case is narrowly focused, ignoring broader market competition in online advertising. They assert their market share is dwindling, and their fees have decreased relative to competitors. The case highlights ongoing scrutiny of Google’s market practices, with another antitrust suit over its search engine already identifying it as a monopoly. The judge’s ruling is expected by the year’s end.
- https://www.reuters.com/legal/googles-ai-previews-erode-internet-edtech-company-says-lawsuit-2025-02-24/ – Chegg, a US-based educational technology company, has filed a lawsuit against Google, claiming that the tech giant’s AI-generated content is undermining the digital publishing industry by reducing demand for original work and driving users away from publishers’ websites. As a result, Chegg has experienced a significant drop in visitors and subscribers, which has led the company to consider a sale or privatization. Google spokesperson Jose Castaneda dismissed the claims, arguing that AI overviews help users and drive traffic to various sites. Additionally, Chegg accuses Google of profiting from its content without proper compensation and argues that this practice violates antitrust laws. This lawsuit marks the first instance of a company alleging antitrust violations by Google through the use of AI overviews.
Noah Fact Check Pro
The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.
Freshness check
Score:
8
Notes:
The narrative is recent, with the earliest known publication date being July 4, 2025. The report cites a formal antitrust complaint filed with the European Commission on June 30, 2025, by a coalition of independent publishers against Google’s AI Overviews feature. This complaint alleges that Google’s AI-generated summaries are adversely affecting media traffic and revenues. The report also references similar concerns raised in the United States, indicating that the issue has been reported in multiple reputable outlets. However, the report does not provide specific publication dates for these earlier reports, making it challenging to assess the freshness of the content fully. Additionally, the report includes updated data, such as the decline in search-driven traffic to major US media outlets coinciding with Google’s AI Overview launch in May 2024, which may justify a higher freshness score. Nonetheless, the lack of specific publication dates for earlier reports and the inclusion of updated data suggest that the content is relatively fresh. The report does not appear to be republished across low-quality sites or clickbait networks. The narrative is based on a formal complaint, which typically warrants a high freshness score. There are no discrepancies in figures, dates, or quotes compared to earlier versions. The report includes updated data but does not recycle older material, justifying a higher freshness score.
Quotes check
Score:
9
Notes:
The report includes direct quotes from the formal antitrust complaint filed by the Independent Publishers Alliance, dated June 30, 2025. These quotes are specific to this complaint and do not appear in earlier material, indicating that they are original or exclusive content. There are no variations in the wording of the quotes compared to other sources.
Source reliability
Score:
8
Notes:
The narrative originates from a reputable organization, the Independent Publishers Alliance, which filed the formal antitrust complaint. The report also references other reputable outlets, such as Reuters and the Financial Times, indicating that the information is sourced from credible entities. There are no mentions of unverifiable entities or fabricated information.
Plausability check
Score:
8
Notes:
The claims made in the report are plausible and align with known concerns about Google’s AI Overviews feature. The report provides specific data, such as the decline in search-driven traffic to major US media outlets coinciding with Google’s AI Overview launch in May 2024, which supports the plausibility of the claims. The language and tone are consistent with the region and topic, and there are no inconsistencies or suspicious elements.
Overall assessment
Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): PASS
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): HIGH
Summary:
The narrative presents recent and original content, with direct quotes from a formal antitrust complaint filed by a reputable organization. The information is sourced from credible entities, and the claims made are plausible and supported by specific data. There are no indications of recycled content, unverifiable entities, or disinformation. Therefore, the overall assessment is a PASS with high confidence.
Register for Editor’s picks
Stay ahead of the curve with our Editor's picks newsletter – your weekly insight into the trends, challenges, and innovations driving the future of digital media.
