Sign in Subscribe
Search

One year after Google apologized to web creators at summit

Small website publishers reflect on traffic losses and algorithm changes one year after October 29, 2024 summit where executives apologized then revealed more AI.

Luis Rijo

• 13 min read

On October 29, 2024, 20 small and independent web publishers gathered at Google's headquarters in Mountain View for what the company called a Web Creators Summit. Executives from the search giant offered apologies for algorithm changes that had decimated website traffic. Those same executives then spent their earnings call that afternoon discussing plans to expand artificial intelligence features that would keep users within search results.

Nate Hake sat in that room listening to two different stories. In one ear, Pandu Nayak and other Google Search executives apologized to the assembled creators. Their websites had lost massive amounts of traffic through what Google termed "collateral damage" in its push toward an "AI-first" future. In his other ear, via an earbud, Hake monitored Google's quarterly earnings call where CEO Sundar Pichai painted a very different picture for investors.

"In one ear I listened to 2 Google Search execs sitting in front of me – they were apologizing to the 20 small & independent web publishers in the room," Hake wrote in an October 29, 2025 post reflecting on the summit. "And, on the earnings call, my other ear heard a VERY different story from Sundar Pichai."

The summit took place after months of traffic losses for independent publishers following algorithm updates throughout 2023 and 2024. Many attendees had seen their businesses devastated by changes to how search results appeared and ranked content. Google hosted its first Web Creator Event as publishers report 70-100% traffic losses, with some reporting declines exceeding 90 percent.

PPC Land Newsletter

Subscribe PPC Land newsletter ✉️ for similar stories like this one

Subscribe

During the question and answer portion, Hake asked Google Search executive Pandu Nayak directly how human web creators were supposed to survive in the new AI-first environment. The response proved evasive. "Nayak was clearly caught off guard by my question and fumbled around for an answer," Hake wrote. "He failed to answer the question directly -- but did say we should lean in and use AI to create content ourselves."

That suggestion ran counter to what many independent publishers believed about quality content creation. The assembled creators had invested years building authentic content written by humans for human readers. Now Google suggested they should generate content using the same artificial intelligence that was replacing their work in search results.

The contradiction between the two messages struck several attendees. While Danny Sullivan, then serving as Google's Search Liaison, expressed hope for improvements and organized the summit, company leadership made clear its priorities lay elsewhere. Sullivan expressed hope for a "happy reunion" one year later to celebrate website recovery after algorithmic fixes. That reunion never materialized, and Sullivan himself left the Search Liaison role by August 2025.

"We were given multiple apologies & a promise that Google still cared about human-first web creators," Hake wrote in his October 29, 2025 reflection. "But .... as I sat there, I was also quietly listening to Google's earnings call via an earbud."

Pichai used the earnings call to announce aggressive expansion of artificial intelligence features throughout search. Investors responded positively to news that AI summaries would appear on more queries across more categories. The AI Overviews feature keeps users clicking within search results rather than visiting external websites, which Google framed as an improvement to user experience and a boost to advertising revenue.

Follow PPC Land

Follow on Google, Google News, X, LinkedIn, Mastodon, Bluesky, or via RSS

"More AI summaries = more money for Google & its shareholders," Hake observed. "But .... what did this mean for websites like ours that still invested in creating content 'by people, for people'?"

The financial impact on attending publishers was substantial. Many paid their own travel expenses to reach Mountain View at a time when their businesses faced existential threats from traffic losses. Mike Hardaker of Mountain Weekly News shared during the summit that after grossing $250,000 the previous year, his traffic had dropped 97 percent and he was eating at food banks.

Google provided limited concrete solutions during the summit. Attendees reported being told that recovery would not come quickly, that the format of search results had fundamentally changed, and that traffic levels from September 2023 would not return. Some sites might recover "ONE DAY," according to statements from Google representatives, but not all would.

One year later, the outcomes vary significantly among summit attendees. Some websites recovered portions of their traffic through subsequent algorithm adjustments. Others continued declining or shut down entirely as their business models collapsed without search traffic.

"Since then, some of us got our traffic back. Others saw their websites die," wrote Gisele Navarro on October 29, 2025, marking the anniversary. Navarro serves as operations manager at ThisIsFresh and had attended the summit after experiencing her own traffic losses. "One day, we will all stand up in court."

The threat of legal action reflects growing frustration among publishers about their relationship with search engines. Raptive sued Google for ad tech monopolization in October 2025, filing a 93-page complaint alleging the company manipulated advertising auctions and harmed publisher revenue for over a decade.

In the year since the summit, Google's stock price increased 58 percent while AI Overviews expanded globally. The feature now operates in 200 countries and 40 languages, appearing on more than 1.5 billion user queries monthly. Research from multiple sources shows these AI summaries reduce clicks to publisher websites substantially.

The destruction of independent publishing businesses accelerated throughout 2024 and 2025. Geekflare, a technology publisher launched in 2015, reduced from 53 employees to 2 people after experiencing a 90 percent traffic decline. The site dropped from 6 million monthly pageviews following algorithm changes. Healthy Framework, an eight-year-old dating industry publisher, announced closure on January 2, 2025 after losing 98 percent of its revenue. Australian lifestyle publication DMARGE spent $200,000 attempting recovery after traffic plummeted from 8 million monthly unique visitors to 300,000, with no improvement despite following all recommended practices.

Advertise on ppc land

Buy ads on PPC Land. PPC Land has standard and native ad formats via major DSPs and ad platforms like Google Ads. Via an auction CPM, you can reach industry professionals.

Learn more

HouseFresh lost 95 percent of its traffic after the September 2023 update, dropping from 4,000 daily visitors to 200. The site independently purchases and tests air purifiers through long-term performance assessments, yet ranks below sponsored results and forum discussions. Ready Steady Cut, an independent film review site, reported an 80 percent traffic reduction by December 2023, falling from 1.5 million monthly views and forcing the company to lay off its entire 20-person writing team.

Analysis published by Ahrefs found that when AI Overviews appear in search results, the first organic link loses an average of 34.5 percent of clicks. The study compared 300,000 searches from March 2024 with March 2025 data. Another study from February 2025 documented even larger declines, showing a 54.6 percent reduction in organic click-through rates for queries with AI summaries.

Larger publishers have joined independent creators in expressing concern. Dotdash Meredith reported a 3 percent session decline during the first quarter of 2025, with CEO Neil Vogel noting AI Overviews appear on approximately one-third of search results related to their content. BuzzFeed warned shareholders in August 2025 that AI-generated summaries could lead to fewer clicks and reduced advertising revenue.

The publisher advocacy has grown more organized since the summit. Ziff Davis coordinated a publisher coalition to address concerns about AI impact on content businesses. Penske Media filed suit against Google over AI Overviews in late 2025. News Media Alliance called Google's AI features "theft" and demanded Department of Justice intervention.

Recent analysis from SISTRIX documented systematic patterns in AI Mode favoring properties owned by the search giant itself. Following the October 31, 2025 launch in Germany, the analytics company examined millions of AI-generated responses. YouTube captured 40.08 percent of AI Mode citations while Google.com received 31.69 percent. Combined, these two Google-owned properties accounted for over 71 percent of the top citations, demonstrating what critics term "self-preference" in artificial intelligence search results.

"Google did tweak its algos a bit, and a few of the websites in that room benefited. I am proud if our efforts contributed to that," Hake wrote. "BUT, by and large, most human-first web publishers are still struggling to be seen in Google's sea of AI Overviews, Reddit & AI spam."

Quality concerns about AI Overviews emerged as the feature expanded globally. Lily Ray, vice president of SEO strategy and research at Amsive, documented in May 2025 how spam and manipulation exploit AI-generated summaries. SEO professionals and spammers identified that AI Overviews often regurgitate content verbatim or hallucinate incorrect information without fact-checking against other sources. One particularly effective manipulation involves creating listicles claiming a person or company ranks as "best" in a category, even when published on that entity's own website. Ray found it "mind-boggling" that Google, which historically excelled at identifying search spam, now elevates "problematic, biased and spammy answers and citations in AI Overview results."

The terminology around content creation has shifted during the year. Google executives increasingly use "creator" to refer to customers of Google Cloud who generate content using Gemini artificial intelligence rather than human writers and publishers. This linguistic change reflects a broader shift in how Google frames content production.

Algorithm updates appeared to disproportionately impact independent publishers while favoring established brands. In December 2024, Google's spam update caused independent website Replay Jutsu to disappear from search results even for branded keywords. Website owner Masab Farooque noted that sites with "general authority" received favorable treatment despite content quality concerns, leading him to conclude that "anything that is not a 'brand' is 'spam' for Google." Another affected publisher observed that "their threshold for what is a brand is really high. Basically you're either Pepsi or nothing." The pattern repeated across numerous independent sites documenting traffic losses of 50 to 95 percentthroughout 2024.

"Meanwhile, on Twitter, Google execs now often use the term 'creator' to refer not to human-first web publishers -- but to customers of Google Cloud: spammers who use Gemini to fill the web with AI slop content," Hake observed. "You see, Google is in the AI spam business now."

The fundamental business model of the open web depends on search engines sending traffic to independent publishers who monetize visitors through advertising or subscriptions. Publishers create content that search engines index. Users find content through search. Both parties benefit from the exchange. AI summaries that answer queries without requiring clicks disrupt this arrangement.

"Google is using AI to become the web -- to pump out content that costs them nothing because their AI stole it from other websites," Hake wrote. "Like a parasite, Google is using AI to suck as much value as it can from the Internet."

This characterization gained support from data showing imbalanced relationships between AI companies and publishers. Cloudflare research from September 2025 documented that Anthropic crawled 38,000 pages for every visitor it sent back to websites. Training-related crawling by AI companies increased to 79 percent of all bot traffic by mid-2025.

Google defended its approach throughout the year. Search VP Nick Fox stated in May 2025 that studies showing click-through rate decreases used flawed methodologies. Google VP Liz Reid claimed clicks from AI Overviews delivered higher quality engagement than traditional search visits. CEO Pichai maintained that AI features send traffic to a "wider set of websites."

These claims conflicted with publisher experiences and independent research data. The disconnect between company statements and documented impacts created additional frustration among content creators who saw their businesses decline while Google reported record earnings.

The trajectory concerns small publishers because it suggests a future where AI provides all answers directly within search interfaces. Some search engine optimization experts warn of a potential "zero result SERP" scenario where organic listings disappear entirely. Zero-click searches increased from 56 percent to 69 percent of Google queries since AI Overviews launched in May 2024.

Alternative artificial intelligence platforms present both opportunities and challenges for publishers. ChatGPT referrals to news sites increased 25 times year-over-year through May 2025. However, these referrals remain a small fraction of traditional search traffic volumes. Publishers report mixed results from being cited in conversational AI responses.

The marketing implications extend beyond individual publisher concerns. The entire digital advertising ecosystem developed around search traffic and website visits. Changes to how users discover information affect advertisers, agencies, and platforms that depend on attention economy metrics. Businesses that invested in content marketing as their primary customer acquisition channel face strategic decisions about resource allocation.

For independent publishers who attended the summit, the past year confirmed their fears about algorithmic dependency. Building a business on traffic from a single source proved vulnerable when that source changed its fundamental approach to information delivery. Diversification strategies including newsletters, social media, and direct reader relationships became more critical.

"And, overall, Google is ALL in on AI," Hake wrote. "AI Overviews & AI Mode have now gone global."

The summit itself revealed tensions between different parts of the organization. Sullivan and some Google employees demonstrated genuine concern for independent publishers. Engineering and product leadership prioritized features that reduced publisher clicks. The contradiction illustrated broader challenges when platform business interests conflict with ecosystem health.

Large publishers responded more slowly than independent creators but eventually recognized similar threats. Media companies with substantial resources and brand recognition still saw measurable traffic declines. Their later involvement added credibility to independent publisher complaints that Google representatives had initially dismissed or minimized.

"And large publishers have finally woken up to the reality of what is happening -- and some are finally joining us small sites in fighting back," Hake noted. "I wish they would have listened to us indie sites a year ago when we forewarned of this -- but better late than never, I guess."

The regulatory environment remains uncertain. Multiple antitrust actions target Google's search and advertising practices. Investigations in Brazil, the European Union, and the United States examine whether AI features harm competition or violate intellectual property rights. Publishers hope legal proceedings will force changes to how AI summaries use their content.

"One day, we will all stand up in court," Navarro wrote, echoing sentiments from other publishers who see litigation as their remaining option.

The anniversary of the summit marked a moment for reflection on broader questions about artificial intelligence and information economics. Who benefits when AI companies train on public web content then provide answers that reduce clicks to source material? How should value flow between content creators and platforms that aggregate their work? What obligations do dominant search engines have to the ecosystem they index?

These questions extend beyond the specific complaints of 20 publishers who gathered at Google's headquarters on October 29, 2024. The summit represented a microcosm of larger tensions as artificial intelligence transforms how information gets discovered, consumed, and monetized online.

Hake concluded his reflection with a warning about the sustainability of Google's approach. "But there's a problem when a parasite gets too greedy: It can kill its host," he wrote. "If Google keeps down this path of steamrolling human creators & publishers, who will create the content for its AI to summarize?"

The question remains unanswered as the search giant continues expanding AI features while publisher traffic declines.

Timeline

PPC Land Newsletter

Subscribe PPC Land newsletter ✉️ for similar stories like this one

Subscribe

Summary

Who: Twenty small and independent web publishers attended Google's Web Creators Summit on October 29, 2024. Nate Hake, founder of Travel Lemming, and Gisele Navarro, operations manager at ThisIsFresh, were among the attendees. Google Search executives including Pandu Nayak participated, along with Danny Sullivan who organized the event as Search Liaison.

What: Google held a summit to address publisher concerns about traffic losses from algorithm changes. Executives apologized for websites becoming "collateral damage" while simultaneously announcing expanded AI features during the earnings call held the same day. Publishers received little concrete help, with Google stating that September 2023 traffic levels would not return because search had "fundamentally changed." One year later, some websites recovered traffic while others failed completely.

When: The summit occurred on October 29, 2024, with reflections posted exactly one year later on October 29, 2025. Traffic losses began with algorithm updates throughout 2023 and 2024. AI Overviews launched broadly in May 2024 and expanded to over 100 countries by late October 2024. The past year saw Google's stock increase 58 percent while publisher traffic declined substantially.

Where: The summit took place at Google's headquarters in Mountain View, California. The impacts affect independent publishers globally as AI Overviews now operate in 200 countries and 40 languages. The phenomenon extends throughout the digital publishing ecosystem including news sites, travel blogs, review sites, and other content businesses dependent on search traffic.

Why: Publishers faced traffic losses of 70 to 100 percent following algorithm changes. Google prioritized artificial intelligence features that keep users within search results rather than clicking through to websites. This shift serves investor interests by increasing advertising revenue while fundamentally disrupting the business model of independent publishers who depend on search traffic. The change reflects broader tensions between platform business interests and the health of the open web ecosystem that platforms index for content.