Google CEO Pichai now calls links a "part" of search, redefining the web's role in its own product

Google is shifting its narrative about its relationship with the open web, and it's not even subtle anymore.

Google used to at least try giving the impression that the open web was a partner for its AI offerings and would get a fair shake. In a recent podcast after I/O, CEO Sundar Pichai sounded far more guarded.

Asked whether Google would still show links going forward, Pichai said, "Sources and links will always be there as part of it." Worth pausing on that. Sources and links as a part of search. Not its foundation.

If sources and links are just a feature, what exactly is the product? Pichai can't mean searching within AI models trained on stale data. And even then, sources and links aren't "part" of that training. They very much are the training.

That framing signals where Google is heading: quietly sidelining the open web's role in its own product. Google's AI answers will keep pulling from web content, but that content is getting pushed further into the background as the answer engine takes over. Pichai also pointed to long-term product metrics showing clearly positive reactions to AI search, saying users keep coming back.

Recent technical changes back this up. Take the "preferred sources" feature, which lets users pick their own sources. Sounds like more control. In reality, it's a fig leaf, since almost nobody will bother using it. But it gives Google a handy talking point: users have a choice. Outside preferred sources, Google can hand out web visibility in AI search however it sees fit. Another new feature shows websites right inside the chat, so users never have to leave the Google ecosystem.

Every AI update from I/O pushes in the same direction. Google is pulling search away from a link directory and turning it into a system that gives answers, gets tasks done, and keeps users inside its own interface. That's closer to the founders' original vision: a machine that just answers your questions.

This is not about lost traffic

The potential financial hit to website operators is just one piece of this. Stuff dies, nothing lasts forever, and AI answers are handy and good enough. Fair enough.

The social impact matters more. Google already holds enormous power as a traffic gatekeeper. The company basically decides what information people see. With traditional search, it could at least lean on user intent and established media. Good results got clicks. If users found what they needed, they came back.

AI search breaks that loop. When Google writes the answers itself and only shows sources—ones almost nobody clicks anyway—inside its own interface, picking those sources becomes an editorial power grab. It's about which voices Google pulls into its answer engine (and quietly pays for) and which ones vanish. That turns Google from an information broker into a publisher whose editorial calls get made by its algorithm.

The risk is plain. A Google-curated slice of the web fighting for a tiny sliver of visibility inside an AI response. For a society that funnels most of its information searches through one access point, that should be alarming, especially when it comes to the further fracturing of public discourse. Instead of shared reference points drawn from a few hundred relevant websites, every user gets their own AI-generated answer, controlled by Google.