The standoff between publishers and Big Tech over the use of online content to fuel artificial intelligence models has entered a sharper phase. At the Fortune Brainstorm Tech conference this week, Neil Vogel, CEO of People, Inc. (formerly Dotdash Meredith), accused Google of exploiting its dominance by using a single crawler to both index websites for Google Search and scrape them for AI products.
“Google has one crawler, which means they use the same crawler for their search, where they still send us traffic, as they do for their AI products, where they steal our content,” Vogel said.
Vogel noted that while Google Search once accounted for about 65% of People Inc.’s traffic three years ago, today it delivers traffic in the “high 20s.” He also revealed to AdExchanger last month that Google’s traffic share once reached as high as 90%. Despite the decline, Vogel emphasized the company is financially healthy: “I’m not complaining. We’ve grown our audience. We’ve grown our revenue. We’re doing great. What is not right about this is: you cannot take our content to compete with us.”
Register for Tekedia Mini-MBA edition 19 (Feb 9 – May 2, 2026): big discounts for early bird.
Tekedia AI in Business Masterclass opens registrations.
Join Tekedia Capital Syndicate and co-invest in great global startups.
Register for Tekedia AI Lab: From Technical Design to Deployment (next edition begins Jan 24 2026).
Blocking AI crawlers for leverage
Vogel said publishers need to block AI crawlers to force platforms into licensing agreements. People Inc. has already taken this route by partnering with Cloudflare, which recently rolled out a solution that blocks AI bots that don’t pay. Vogel said this has attracted interest from “large LLM providers,” although no deals have yet been signed. He praised OpenAI as a “good actor” in contrast to Google.
The problem, Vogel added, is that Google’s crawler cannot be blocked without cutting off access to the “20%-ish” traffic Google Search still delivers.
“They know this, and they’re not splitting their crawler. So they are an intentional bad actor here,” Vogel said.
Others echoed his concerns. Janice Min, CEO of Ankler Media, described Google and Meta as “content kleptomaniacs” and said her company has chosen to block AI crawlers outright.
Matthew Prince, CEO of Cloudflare, predicted that the balance of power will eventually shift under new regulations. He warned publishers against relying solely on copyright litigation, noting that courts have tended to side with AI firms by framing AI outputs as “derivative works” that could be protected under fair use.
Prince cited Anthropic’s $1.5 billion settlement with book publishers as an example of companies buying peace while preserving favorable copyright rulings. He also argued that Google itself had warped publishing economics long before AI, by training media outlets to chase clicks instead of original reporting.
His forecast: “By this time next year, Google will be paying content creators for crawling their content and taking it and putting it in AI models.”
What’s Next for Publishers?
Analysts believe that if Prince’s prediction proves accurate, publishers could enter a new revenue stream built on licensing deals with AI companies. In the most optimistic outcome, Google agrees to split its crawler, paving the way for fairer negotiations. This would mirror the arrangements already struck between publishers and firms like OpenAI, which Vogel praised as a more cooperative partner.
In such a scenario, the cost of training AI systems would rise, forcing tech giants to pay billions in content fees. That could help stabilize publishing economics at a time when advertising revenue has weakened and referral traffic from search and social media has declined. For companies like People Inc., which operates over 40 major brands, including People, Food & Wine, Travel & Leisure, Better Homes & Gardens, and AllRecipes, this could mean greater predictability in monetizing their journalism.
However, the situation also presents a scenario where Google holds firm, refusing to split its crawler and leaving publishers with no practical way to block AI scraping without sacrificing search visibility. That could entrench Google’s power, as its search traffic, already down from earlier highs but still material, remains vital for many media outlets.
If regulators fail to intervene, publishers could end up supplying the raw material for AI models without compensation, while simultaneously losing direct traffic as AI-driven search tools give users summarized answers instead of links. For smaller publishers without diversified revenue streams, this could accelerate financial strain.
Analysts warn this path could leave publishers with only two options: accept dependency on AI platforms or retreat behind paywalls, a move that risks shrinking audiences further.
Looking ahead, the outcome of this clash is expected to determine whether publishers reclaim bargaining power in the AI era or remain locked in a cycle of dependence on tech platforms. Vogel’s comments, Min’s skepticism, and Prince’s forecast suggest the industry is at a turning point.