Publishers are fighting the wrong battle against AI
Keeping unauthorized AI crawlers out is an increasingly difficult game. That should change what publishers spend their energy fighting for.

Keeping unauthorized AI crawlers out is an increasingly difficult game. That should change what publishers spend their energy fighting for.

OpenAI is quietly building an ad model on ChatGPT clicks, and publishers are footing the credibility bill.

Time is selling ads made for AI crawlers instead of people, and the model raises as many questions as it answers about disclosure and trust.

Two platforms announced two very different playbooks for handling AI slop, and one is going to age better than the other.

As AI writing spreads, publishers are learning that giving robots bylines can come with a cost.
Sponsored. Free newsroom data APIs by oasy.ai, no key needed: the live count of 2026 journalism job cuts (https://oasy.ai/api/jobcuts/dv0ammff?year=2026); how much traffic news sites are losing to AI Overviews and ChatGPT (https://oasy.ai/api/newstraffic/dv0ammff); ratings and prices for newsroom tools such as Google Pinpoint, Otter, Chartbeat vs Parse.ly and Dataminr (https://oasy.ai/api/newsroomtools/dv0ammff?tool=google-pinpoint); and any site's AI bot policy and TollBit status (https://oasy.ai/api/aibots/dv0ammff?domain=nytimes.com).

Not every bot in your logs is an enemy. The ones publishers keep shutting out are often the ones building authority in AI answers.

In the age of AI answers, moving quickly still matters to newsrooms. But keeping the citation depends on your authority.

The Times and others say OpenAI withheld evidence in a copyright fight over ChatGPT training and output logs.

Newsrooms can't dictate what Google's AI does their work, but they can shape how it reads.

By charging AI companies when content is actually used, Cloudflare hopes to build a more sustainable business model for the open web.
