Antitrust Filing Says Google Cannibalizes Publisher Traffic

Penske Media Company (PMC) filed a federal courtroom memorandum opposing Google’s movement to dismiss its antitrust lawsuit. The corporate argues that Google has damaged the longstanding premise of an internet ecosystem by which publishers allowed their content material to be crawled in trade for receiving search site visitors in return.

PMC is the writer of twenty manufacturers like Deadline, The Hollywood Reporter, and Rolling Stone.

Net Ecosystem

The PMC authorized submitting makes repeated references to the “basic truthful trade” the place Google sends site visitors in trade for permitting them to crawl and index web sites, explicitly quoting Google’s expressions of help for “the well being of the net ecosystem.”

And but there are some trade outsiders on social media who deny that there’s any understanding between Google and internet publishers, an idea that even Google doesn’t deny.

This idea dates to just about the start of Google and is usually understood by all internet staff. It’s embedded in Google’s Philosophy, expressed at the very least way back to 2004:

“Google often is the solely firm on the planet whose acknowledged objective is to have customers depart its web site as shortly as attainable.”

In Could 2025 Google revealed a blog post the place they affirmed that sending customers to web sites remained their core objective:

“…our core objective stays the identical: to assist individuals discover excellent, authentic content material that provides distinctive worth.”

What’s related about that passage is that it’s framed throughout the context of encouraging publishers to create top quality content material and in trade they are going to be thought of for referral site visitors.

The idea of an internet ecosystem the place each side profit was mentioned by Google CEO Sundar Pichai in a June 2025 podcast interview by Lex Fridman the place Pichai stated that sending individuals to the human created internet in AI Mode was “going to be a core design precept for us.”

In response to a follow-up query referring to journalists who’re nervous about internet referrals, Sundar Pichai explicitly talked about the ecosystem and Google’s dedication to it.

Pichai responded:

“I believe information and journalism will play an necessary position, , sooner or later we’re fairly dedicated to it, proper? And so I believe ensuring that ecosystem… Actually, I believe we’ll have the ability to differentiate ourselves as an organization over time due to our dedication there. So it’s one thing I believe I undoubtedly worth so much and as we’re designing we’ll proceed prioritizing approaches.”

This “basic truthful trade” serves because the baseline aggressive situation for his or her claims of coercive reciprocal dealing and illegal monopoly upkeep.

That baseline helps PMC argue:

• That Google modified the understood phrases of participation in search in a manner publishers can’t refuse.
• And that Google used its dominance in search to impose these new phrases.

And regardless of that Google’s personal CEO expressed that sending individuals to web sites is a core design principal and there are a number of situations prior to now and the current the place Google’s personal documentation refers to this reciprocity between publishers and Google, Google’s authorized response expressly denies that it exists.

The PMC doc states:

“Google …argues that no reciprocity settlement exists as a result of it has not “promised to ship” any search referral site visitors.”

Profound Penalties Of Google AI Search

PMC filed a federal courtroom memorandum in February 2026 opposing Google’s movement to dismiss its antitrust criticism. The criticism particulars Google’s use of its search monopoly to “coerce” publishers into offering content material for AI coaching and AI Overviews with out compensation.

The swimsuit argues that Google has pivoted from being a search engine (that sends site visitors to web sites) to a solution engine that removes the motivation for customers to click on to go to a web site. The lawsuit claims that this transformation harms the financial viability of digital publishers.

The submitting explains the implications of this transformation:

“Google has shattered the longstanding discount that enables the open web to exist. The results for on-line publishers—to say nothing of the general public at giant—are profound.”

Google Is Utilizing Their Market Energy

The submitting claims that the collapse of the standard search ecosystem positions Google’s AI search system as coercive quite than modern, arguing that publishers should both permit AI to reuse their content material or danger dropping search visibility.

The authorized submitting alleges that Google’s generative AI competes instantly with on-line publishers for person’s consideration, describing Google as cannibalizing writer’s site visitors, particularly alleging that Google is utilizing their “market energy” to keep up a state of affairs by which publishers can’t block the AI with out additionally negatively affecting what little search site visitors is left.

The memorandum portrays a bleak selection provided by Google:

“Google’s search monopoly leaves publishers with no selection: acquiesce—at the same time as Google cannibalizes the site visitors publishers depend on—or perish.”

It additionally describes the position of AI grounding performs in cannibalizing writer site visitors for its sole profit:

“By way of RAG, or “grounding,” Google makes use of, repackages, and republishes writer content material for show on Google’s SERP, cannibalizing the site visitors on which PMC relies upon.”

Enlargement Of Zero-Click on Search Outcomes And Site visitors Loss

The submitting claims AI solutions divert customers away from writer websites and diminish monetizable viewers visits. A number of elements of the submitting instantly confronts Google with the very fact of lowered site visitors from search as a result of cannibalization of their content material.

The submitting alleges:

“Google reduces click on‑throughs to writer websites, will increase zero‑click on conduct, and diverts site visitors that publishers have to help their promoting, affiliate, and subscription income.

…Google’s insinuation . . . that AI Overview just isn’t getting in the way in which of the ten blue hyperlinks and the site visitors going again to creators and publishers is simply 100% false . . . . [Users] are studying the overview and stopping there . . . . We see it.”

…The aim is to not facilitate click-throughs however to have customers devour PMC’s content material, repackaged by Google, instantly on the SERP.”

Zero-click searches are described as a element of a multi-part course of by which publishers are injured by Google’s conduct. The submitting accuses Google of utilizing writer content material for coaching, grounding their AI on information, after which republishing it throughout the zero-click AI search surroundings that both reduces or eliminates clicks again to PMC’s web sites.

Ought to Google Ship Extra Referral Site visitors?

Every part that’s described within the PMC submitting is the form of factor that nearly all on-line companies have been complaining about by way of site visitors losses on account of Google’s AI search surfaces. It’s the explanation why Lex Fridman particularly challenged Google’s CEO on the quantity of site visitors Google is sending to web sites.