In the escalating battle between media publishers and tech giants, Neil Vogel, CEO of People Inc., has leveled sharp accusations against Google, labeling the company a “bad actor” for allegedly stealing content to fuel its artificial intelligence ambitions. Speaking at the Digiday Publishing Summit, Vogel highlighted how Google’s AI crawler indiscriminately scrapes publisher data, making it impossible to block without also shutting out the search engine’s web crawler—a move that could devastate traffic-dependent sites like People magazine.

This isn’t just a gripe from one executive; it reflects a broader industry outcry as AI tools like Google’s Gemini summarize and repurpose original journalism, often without compensation or credit. Vogel pointed out that publishers face a Hobson’s choice: allow the scraping and lose revenue from diminished clicks, or block it and vanish from search results altogether.

The Technical Bind of AI Crawlers

The crux of the issue lies in Google’s intertwined crawling systems. As detailed in a recent TechCrunch report, Vogel explained that opting out of AI data collection would inadvertently exclude sites from Google’s core search index, a lifeline for digital media. This setup, he argued, gives Google undue leverage, effectively forcing publishers to subsidize the tech giant’s AI advancements.

Industry insiders echo this frustration. For instance, posts on X (formerly Twitter) from users like tech analysts have amplified Vogel’s claims, with one noting that Google’s practices are “outright content theft,” drawing parallels to past criticisms of the company’s data harvesting. Such sentiments underscore a growing consensus that AI training on copyrighted material without permission borders on exploitation.

Historical Context and Ongoing Feuds

This feud isn’t new. Google’s history of antitrust scrutiny, as covered in a New York Times analysis, includes recent rulings that found the company guilty of monopolizing online search and digital advertising markets. In 2025, these legal blows culminated in a $500 million settlement to overhaul internal compliance, per Wikipedia’s comprehensive entry on Google’s criticisms.

Vogel’s comments reignite tensions dating back to 2020 congressional hearings where lawmakers grilled Google CEO Sundar Pichai on similar content theft allegations, as reported by NDTV. Back then, Pichai defended Google’s practices as beneficial to publishers, but Vogel dismisses this, calling AI summaries “cannibalistic” to original reporting.

Potential Models for Coexistence

Amid the acrimony, some see glimmers of hope. A Fortune piece suggests Google-owned YouTube could serve as a blueprint, where content creators earn from ads while the platform thrives. Internet pioneer Bill Gross, quoted in the article, advocates for revenue-sharing models that let media and AI “coexist and thrive.”

Yet, publishers like People Inc. remain skeptical. With traffic plummeting due to AI overviews—Vogel cited a 30% drop in some cases—the industry is pushing for regulatory intervention. Recent web searches reveal mounting calls for updated copyright laws, with Breitbart reporting that Vogel deems Google the “worst” offender in AI content theft.

Broader Implications for Digital Media

The stakes extend beyond one company. As AI reshapes information dissemination, publishers fear a future where original content creators are sidelined. Vogel warned that without fair compensation, quality journalism could wither, leaving AI to regurgitate increasingly homogenized data.

Google, for its part, maintains that its tools drive value back to publishers through increased visibility. But with accusations flying—from X posts decrying “Google’s 20-year monopoly” to fresh reports in Digital Information World about slashed traffic—pressure is mounting. Pichai himself, in a December 2024 CNBC interview, acknowledged high stakes for 2025 amid regulatory hurdles.

Looking Ahead: Calls for Reform

Industry experts predict more lawsuits and lobbying efforts. The Fortune follow-up notes Google’s contradictory stance: claiming the web is “thriving” while internally admitting it’s in “rapid decline.” This dissonance fuels distrust.

For now, Vogel’s bold stance has galvanized publishers, potentially heralding a pivotal shift. As one X post put it, echoing widespread sentiment, Google’s empire might finally face accountability. Whether through negotiation or litigation, the resolution could redefine the balance between tech innovation and content creation in the AI era.