Penske Media Corporation, the parent company of Rolling Stone and The Hollywood Reporter, has become the first major US media group to take Google to court over its use of AI-generated summaries in search results. The company argues that the “AI Overviews” feature, which displays concise summaries at the top of search pages, discourages users from clicking through to the original articles. Penske claims this practice unfairly exploits the work of its journalists while harming traffic and revenue.
The lawsuit highlights growing tensions between publishers and technology companies over the use of artificial intelligence in content distribution. While Google has promoted AI Overviews as a tool to improve search results, critics argue it deprives media outlets of the online traffic they depend on to survive. Penske alleges that its revenue from affiliate links has dropped by more than one-third in 2025, a decline the company directly attributes to reduced traffic from Google searches.
In its complaint, Penske stated that it faces a difficult choice: block Google from indexing its content, which would cut it out of search entirely, or continue to provide material that Google uses to train its AI, further undermining its business. According to the Wall Street Journal, the company described this situation as “adding fuel to a fire that threatens PMC’s entire publishing business.”
Wider backlash against AI Overviews
Although Penske is the most prominent publisher to sue Google over the feature, it is not the first. Earlier this year, US online education firm Chegg filed a similar case, while independent publishers in Europe have also launched legal action. The News/Media Alliance, an industry trade group, has criticised Google’s approach, describing it as the “definition of theft” and calling for government intervention. The alliance has urged the US Department of Justice to investigate.
Google, however, has defended its position. In a statement to the Wall Street Journal, spokesperson José Castañeda said: “With AI Overviews, people find search more helpful and use it more.” The company maintains that the feature enhances the user experience and still provides links to sources. Publishers like Penske disagree, insisting that users no longer feel compelled to click through to the articles, leaving newsrooms with fewer readers and shrinking advertising revenue.
Part of a larger battle over AI and content
The case is the latest in a series of disputes between artificial intelligence firms and the creators of the material they rely on. Encyclopedia Britannica and Merriam-Webster recently sued AI startup Perplexity, accusing it of unauthorised use of their content. Last year, News Corp also took legal action. Meanwhile, Microsoft and OpenAI are facing lawsuits from the New York Times, the New York Daily News, the Chicago Tribune and other major outlets.
Google’s defence may be complicated further by ongoing antitrust investigations. The company has already acknowledged that “the open web is already in rapid decline,” a statement that could add weight to publishers’ claims that its business practices threaten the wider media industry.
The outcome of Penske’s case could set an important precedent for how AI-generated content is treated in relation to journalism, raising broader questions about the future of publishing in the age of artificial intelligence.
