The End of the Click: How Google’s AI Overviews Are Eroding the Open Web
Every day, billions of people turn to Google to find information, research topics, or explore ideas. Recently, a dramatic change in Google’s search interface is quietly reshaping how users engage with content—and putting the very survival of many websites at risk.
New research reveals just how much Google’s AI Overviews are reducing click-throughs. Pew Research tracked 900 U.S. adult internet users over one month and found that when an AI-generated summary appeared at the top of search results, users clicked on links just 8% of the time, compared with 15% when no summary appeared. Only 1% clicked directly within the AI summary itself. Beyond that, users were more likely to end their browsing session entirely—26% ended contact entirely after an AI result versus 16% without one.
That marks a stark shift: AI Overviews are not just reshaping search—they’re diverting attention away from publishers and content creators, accelerating what many experts call the rise of the “zero-click search.”
Traffic declines of up to 80% for publishers
Analysts and media owners are sounding the alarm. Authoritas and The Guardian report that publishers whose sites once held the #1 spot on Google see traffic fall by nearly 80% when their content appears below an AI summary. Small publishers in lifestyle, DIY, cooking, and travel report similar drops of 60–70%, with many seeing advertising revenue vanish nearly overnight. Traditional news outlets like Business Insider, HuffPost, and The Washington Post have faced traffic declines—from 55% at Business Insider alone—forcing layoffs and threatening the viability of long-established media businesses.
Even educational platforms feel the squeeze. Chegg, for example, has joined legal actions against Google—claiming its AI summaries encourage students to favour unverified answers and undermine academic integrity.
At its annual earnings call, Google’s CEO Sundar Pichai pointed to strong ad revenue—$54.2 billion from Search, up 12%—and billions of daily clicks. He emphasized that features like AI Overviews and an experimental AI Mode now serve over two billion and 100 million monthly users respectively. Google claims these features deliver “higher‑quality clicks,” longer visits, and exposure to a broader set of sites.
Yet critics are unconvinced. Experts cite Google’s own AI, Gemini, which reportedly acknowledges traffic loss. Lily Ray of Amsive calls the impact “devastating,” noting that traffic reductions of 20% to 40% are already commonplace and that Google is benefiting from content without fairly compensating its creators.
European publishers have formally filed antitrust complaints with the EU, supported by groups like Foxglove and the Independent Publishers Alliance. Analytics firm SimilarWeb reports that 37 of the top 50 U.S. news sites have seen declines since May 2024, with zero-click searches reaching 69% in May 2025.
AI Mode: the next frontier in search collapse
AI Overviews may only be the beginning. In early 2025 Google began rolling out an experimental AI Mode—a fully conversational interface that removes traditional links entirely. That shift has industry observers worried: if AI Mode becomes default, the route to external websites could vanish altogether.
Former SEO tools executives warn that traditional clicks could vanish entirely, threatening not just revenue—but the diversity of perspectives that make the internet vibrant. With content extraction overtaking content discovery, an existential risk emerges for independent journalism and niche publishing.
Why independence matters
One underlying concern is ethical: Google’s AI summaries are trained on content created by publishers—then monetize that content while preventing users from visiting the original sources. That breaks the ecosystem. Experts worry it creates a feedback loop where fewer clicks lead to less content creation, which leads to less data for training, and thus a weaker web for the next generation.
There’s also a risk for users: AI Overviews sometimes hallucinate. Reports include bizarre suggestions like adding glue to pizza sauce or consuming rocks. Those errors may not just misinform—they could pose real harm.
What publishers and content creators can do
Adaptation is possible. Experts say publishers should optimize content so Google’s summaries highlight them: answer questions immediately, use structured schema markup, write in clear plain language, and embed expertise readers can’t get from AI alone.
Diversifying matters too. Building direct audiences via newsletters, social platforms, YouTube, and even alternative search engines (which don’t yet use AI Overviews at scale) helps reduce dependence on Google traffic.
Tracking data is also essential—Google Search Console can reveal which queries still bring traffic. Publishers should invest in community features, exclusive insights, and offline engagement that AI can’t replicate.
The broader implications
What we’re witnessing is a structural disruption: the transition from a web built on exploration to one served by AI-generated shortcuts. While convenient, that model favors speed over nuance, convenience over discovery, and efficiency over diversity.
Google insists it’s innovating for user benefit. Critics warn of unintended consequences. If searches continue to end within Google’s own ecosystem, publishers stop getting traffic, content quality erodes, and the diversity of viewpoints narrows.
When that happens, it won’t be because users made the wrong choice—it will be because opportunities to choose were quietly removed.
Key Takeaways
- AI Overviews significantly reduce user click-throughs, with only 8% of users visiting external sites when summaries appear.
- Many publishers report traffic losses between 40% and 80%, with some experiencing sharp revenue declines and layoffs.
- Google’s experimental AI Mode may remove traditional links entirely, posing an existential threat to independent content discovery.
- Critics say AI summaries extract value from creators without fair compensation and diminish user agency in the search process.
Sources
- Pew Research Center
- The Guardian
- SimilarWeb
- Wall Street Journal
- Search Engine Journal
- Amsive
- Google Q2 2025 Earnings Call
- Independent Publishers Alliance
- Foxglove
- Business Insider
