The UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) argues that the move will put publishers 'in a stronger position to negotiate content deals
UK officials will require Google to better highlight the sources from which it pulls answers for AI Overviews, and will allow publishers to opt out of having their content included in AI summaries.
Google will have nine months to make these changes, but the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) says it "expects important parts of the controls to become available to publishers well before that deadline."
Google will be "required to make sure that publisher content is properly attributed, using clear links, in AI‑generated search results," according to the CMA, which argues that the move will put publishers "in a stronger position to negotiate content deals with Google."
At I/O last month, Google teased the biggest upgrade to its search box in 25 years. The CMA says its rules will apply there too, but it's "actively monitoring how Google is implementing these changes—including assessing the implications for businesses," and could "bring forward work on further measures to ensure a fair exchange of value between Google and publishers."
In a Tuesday blog post, Google said, "features like AI Overviews and AI Mode are designed to help people find and visit great websites, and to help publishers and websites strengthen their audiences." That includes "prominent links to websites" that serve as "a jumping-off point."
The primary complaint from publishers about Google's AI Overviews, however, is that they reduce clicks to their websites—the very websites from which Google's AI pulls its information. An August survey from Digital Content Next (DCN) found that median year-over-year referral traffic from Google Search dropped 10% in May and June 2025, though some of the worst-hit publishers reported click-through declines of up to 25%.
Google says it's now testing "a new control that lets website owners manage how their links and content appear in generative AI Search features." It will give website owners more information through the Search Console, including impression data on which pages appear in AI search summaries and for which countries.
Those who opt out will not be penalized in traditional search rankings, it says. The test is rolling out to a subset of UK website owners, but will eventually be available globally.
Not a fan of AI summaries? We have a few tips for removing them.
SPLC Employee Funneled $1.2 Million To Neo-Nazi Lover
F-30 (Nazi/KKK/Aryan Nations leader): Paid more than $70K after asking to leave the movement. Instead, the SPLC allegedly kept them on salary to host rallies, recruit, and publish extremist material.
F-31 & F-32 (KKK members): Wanted out in 2010 but were allegedly bribed to stay active. Funds reimbursed cross-burning materials, including wood and fuel, and helped them gain leadership roles.
F-37 (Unite the Right): Paid over $300K. This individual was in the leadership chat for the 2017 Charlottesville rally, made racist posts under SPLC supervision, and arranged transportation for attendees.
F-42 (Neo-Nazi National Alliance chairman): Received $155K+ while simultaneously listed on the SPLC's own "Extremist File" webpage.
Additional payments: Approximately $350K to a National Socialist Movement officer and $19K to American Front's national president, a convicted cross-burning felon.
yesterday my grandma found a penny on the floor and said to my grandpa “there’s that penny again, pa!” and i absolutely lost my mind because i couldn’t shelve the thought of a single panel Far Side comic of two old people on the front porch in the middle of nowhere and a giant penny angrily and inexplicably rolling through the wastes
It’s so funny how leftists scream and cry about “book bannings” when it’s…schools and libraries just choosing not to carry certain books. No state has outlawed these books. It’s not illegal to read these books. This isn’t Fahrenheit 451. No one is stopping your 13-year-old kid from picking up a copy of Fun Home from Barnes and Noble if she really wants to read it that badly, Debra.
I agree, but it's not just allowing. It's encouraging, and, in some cases, directing.
Placing these books in school libraries is always an active choice, someone must want the children to see the book, go out and buy the book, and place it in the school.
Someone decides what books go on the fancy display table.
The average person cannot name a single truly banned book.
I am absolutely against censorship and the illegality of information on all parts and points.
But there is a difference between “you will be arrested for writing/publishing/buying a book/digital media” and “showing porn to minors is a crime”
if woke parents want to show these books to their children, good do what you want, but the school/library using my tax dollars to groom children is a whole different story.
origamiaround
prguitarman
dededos
janainaart
romaincrisis
turnnoffyourmind
areudirty
