By Manisha Sahu, America News World
Date: October 17, 2025
In a dramatic escalation of the tensions between legacy media and Big Tech, Italian newspaper publishers have formally requested a regulatory investigation into Google’s AI Overviews feature—arguing that it is starving news sites of traffic, undermining media diversity, and threatening journalistic sustainability.
The Federation of Italian Newspaper Publishers (FIEG) lodged a complaint on October 16 with Agcom, Italy’s communications regulatory authority. The crux of the complaint: Google’s AI-generated summary boxes, which appear at the top of search results, are diverting readers away from news websites, thereby undercutting their advertising revenue and visibility.
“Google is becoming a traffic killer,” FIEG declared in its submission, stating that such design choices not only compete directly with publisher content, but diminish discoverability and threaten the economic basis of journalism.
Also read:- Frustrated Gen Z Threatens to Topple African Governments
Background: What Is Google’s AI Overviews?
Launched in 2024, AI Overviews are sho summaries automatically generated by Google’s AI (drawing on web content) and displayed at the top of relevant search result pages. The idea is to give users quick, contextual answers without requiring them to click through to external sites.
Google also offers a companion feature called AI Mode, which behaves more like a chatbot—integrating information from multiple sources. Publishers worry that AI Mode amplifies the same structural problem: presenting synthesized content instead of routing users to original journalism.
Supporters of AI Overviews argue that it improves user experience by providing instant relevant information and that it can drive “better quality” clicks to sites. Google maintains that AI Overviews, along with traditional link-based results, can coexist in a “healthy ecosystem” for publishers and users alike.
Also read :-Brown University Rejects Trump’s Higher Education Compact
The Publishers’ Case: Traffic Drops, Revenue Declines, and Media Risk
The heart of the complaint is empirical: publishers say that since AI Overviews began rolling out in Italy (around March 2025), referral traffic from Google has dropped steeply. The FIEG submission cites internal data, as well as independent studies, claiming click-through rates have plunged by as much as 80 % for certain queries.
One July 2025 study by analytics firm Authoritas found that AI Overviews reduced traffic to many publishers’ pages and disproportionately favored YouTube links—owned by Google’s parent company Alphabet.
Likewise, Pew Research Center data suggests that under many AI summaries, users only click on external links in 1 out of 100 cases—a striking decline in engagement with original sources.
FIEG warns this is not a minor disruption but a threat to media plurality and democratic discourse. As fewer readers access full stories, publishers lose ad revenue, and the variety of voices in public debate shrinks.
They further argue that this model essentially forces publishers into a coercive “choice”—grant Google access to their content for summarization or risk being buried entirely.
Broader Complaints in Europe and Beyond
Italy is not alone. Earlier in 2025, a coalition of independent European publishers lodged an antitrust complaint with the European Commission, accusing Google of abusing its dominance in online search by using publisher content without offering a real opt-out.
These publishers contend that Google’s dual role—as a search indexer and as a producer of AI-generated answers—creates a structural conflict of interest. The complaint requests interim measures to protect publishers from further harm while investigations proceed.
In parallel, lawsuits in the U.S. have emerged. Notably, Chegg—an online learning company—has sued Google over AI Overviews, alleging traffic and revenue losses caused by the summaries.
Google’s Defense & the Regulatory Landscape
Google has pushed back on many of these allegations. It criticizes some of the cited studies as methodologically flawed, and argues that traffic fluctuations can stem from many factors—algorithm changes, seasonal demand, evolving user behavior—not merely the presence of AI Overviews.
Still, Google says it is working to balance traditional web links and AI-generated responses to preserve discoverability. The company insists that AI Overviews can drive users deeper into more sources by prompting related queries.
Italy’s recent adoption of a comprehensive AI regulation, aligning with the EU’s AI Act, gives this case extra heft. The legislation imposes liability rules and governance on AI use, including obligations to prevent misuse and ensure transparency.
If Agcom finds merit in FIEG’s complaint, it could trigger penalties or binding directives restricting how Google uses publisher content in AI Overviews.
What’s Next & Why It Matters
The Italian publishers’ complaint could mark a turning point in the power struggle over digital journalism’s future. If regulators demand changes, Google might be forced to adjust how AI Overviews are generated, present options for publishers to opt out, or share more revenue or attribution.
For publishers worldwide, the outcome may define whether AI summarization becomes a tool for democratizing access—or a mechanism for monopolizing content. With newsrooms already under financial stress, the stakes couldn’t be higher.
America News World by Manisha Sahu will continue to monitor developments and report as the case evolves.