Google’s AI Mode Slammed as ‘Theft’ by News Publishers Over Content Usage

Google has found itself in the crosshairs of major U.S. news publishers following the rollout of its revamped AI Mode, a feature embedded directly into its search results. The tool, resembling an AI-powered chatbot, is intended to streamline user experience by providing AI-generated summaries and answers. However, publishers argue this convenience comes at a steep cost: the systematic harvesting and repurposing of journalistic content without consent or compensation.

Google’s AI Mode ‘theft’: A Battle Over Content Rights

In what some industry voices have called an existential threat to journalism, the News/Media Alliance—which represents leading publishers like Condé Nast and Vox Media—voiced its outrage. During Google I/O 2025, the tech giant announced AI Mode’s full rollout to U.S. users. This system replaces traditional search layouts with AI responses, paired only with a limited selection of link references.

Danielle Coffey, CEO and President of the News/Media Alliance, minced no words in a sharp rebuke. She emphasized, “Links were the last redeeming quality of search that gave publishers traffic and revenue. Now Google just takes content by force and uses it with no return—the definition of theft.”

This isn’t mere hyperbole. Publishers fear massive declines in web traffic, directly impacting their ad revenue and viability. The crux of the issue lies in AI Mode’s dependence on summarizing source material without direct engagement—effectively bypassing the traditional click-through model that supports digital journalism.

Inside Google’s Justification and Industry Pushback

According to internal documents surfaced during the ongoing antitrust lawsuit against Google, the company chose not to seek publisher permission before incorporating their work into AI Mode. Instead, it enforced a harsh ultimatum: opt out of all Google search visibility if you wish to avoid being included in AI summaries.

Liz Reid, head of Google Search, defended the approach, citing that a feature-by-feature opt-out would introduce “enormous complexity.” But this defense offers little solace to publishers relying on nuanced digital strategies for visibility and growth.

Industry insiders argue that this blanket approach essentially holds publishers hostage. Opting out of AI features means sacrificing organic search discoverability altogether—a trade-off most cannot afford. As other English tech news sources have noted, the development could mark a paradigm shift in digital media economics, further consolidating power in the hands of tech conglomerates.

Google AI Mode: Redefining Search with Intelligence, Context, and Action

The Legal and Ethical Debate Around AI Content Aggregation

Legally, the issue revolves around the concept of fair use and the boundaries of transformative content. While AI-generated summaries might technically constitute new creations, their reliance on copyrighted material raises fundamental ethical concerns. Is it fair for Google to profit off the journalistic labor of others while cutting them out of the revenue loop?

Many legal experts predict a coming storm of litigation. And with the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice already scrutinizing Big Tech, AI Mode could become a landmark issue. The implications extend beyond publishing, raising questions about data ownership, copyright law, and corporate accountability in the age of AI.

Media organizations are now exploring countermeasures, including technology to detect and block AI scraping, as well as potential alliances to lobby for legislative protections. Meanwhile, platforms like ZoomBangla’s English news section are assessing how to adapt without sacrificing visibility or integrity.

Will This Redefine the Relationship Between Tech and Journalism?

What’s clear is that the introduction of AI Mode without publisher consent has intensified an already fraught relationship. For decades, newsrooms have navigated the tension of platform dependence—leveraging Google’s reach while being vulnerable to its algorithmic shifts. Now, they’re confronting an even deeper entanglement, one that risks devaluing original content in the eyes of both users and advertisers.

With publishers calling the practice ‘theft,’ and Google framing it as progress, a reckoning seems imminent. Whether through policy, court rulings, or public pressure, the next chapter will determine whether innovation and information equity can coexist in the digital age.

Sadie Sink Set to Play Mayday Parker in Tom Holland’s Spider-Man: Brand New Day

Google’s AI Mode ‘theft’ controversy serves as a litmus test for the future of content ownership. News publishers are drawing a line in the sand, demanding not just traffic, but justice. This battle isn’t just about links—it’s about the soul of journalism in an AI-driven world.

FAQs

What is Google’s AI Mode and why is it controversial?

Google’s AI Mode is a search feature that presents AI-generated responses instead of traditional search results. It’s controversial because it repurposes content from news publishers without consent or direct traffic benefits.

How are news publishers reacting to AI Mode?

Many news publishers, including major U.S. outlets, are outraged, labeling the feature as ‘theft’ and calling for legal and regulatory intervention to protect their content and revenue streams.

Blue Lock Chapter 303 Release Date, Time, and Story Insights

Is there a way for publishers to opt out of AI Mode?

Currently, the only option is to opt out of all Google search results, which severely limits a publisher’s visibility. Google has not provided feature-specific opt-out capabilities.

What could be the legal consequences for Google?

Google could face lawsuits or regulatory penalties, particularly if courts or agencies determine that AI Mode violates copyright laws or constitutes anti-competitive behavior.

How does this impact smaller or independent publishers?

Smaller publishers are especially vulnerable, as they rely heavily on search traffic. AI Mode may disproportionately harm their ability to attract readers and generate revenue.