Solution or dependence?

(CLO) AI search engines are testing a revenue-sharing program with publishers when their content is used in search results. Is this a fair solution for journalism or just another form of dependence on technology?

Is location a friend?

Perplexity, an AI search company, is seeking to connect with publishers through a partnership program launched last summer. Since then, the program has garnered attention from major media outlets such as TIME, Fortune, and Der Spiegel, but has also attracted niche media outlets such as the Black American creative community Blavity.

Unlike other AI generative giants, such as OpenAI or Gemini, Perplexity doesn't train any models. It's a search engine that answers user questions by summarizing content from websites instead of just providing a series of links—a crucial difference as it changes how publishers use content.

The AI ​​search engine Perplexity has expanded its partnership program with publishers by offering revenue sharing for ad-sponsored questions, along with free access to Perplexity Pro.

Accordingly, when people use Perplexity to ask questions, the AI ​​typically relies on content from news organizations and other publishers to provide answers. Now, Perplexity is considering giving something back through a revenue-sharing program.

When advertisers pay to sponsor questions on Perplexity's platform, publishers whose content is cited in the answers receive a share of the profits. The company also offers several technological perks – publishers can use Perplexity's AI technology on their own websites, and their staff get free access to Perplexity's premium services for a year.

"We built this program to ensure we have a scalable and sustainable way to tailor incentives for all parties," said Aravind Srinivas, CEO of Perplexity.

"The company wants to position itself as a friend rather than an enemy of traditional media," Jessica Chan, the new director of publisher partnerships, stressed the desire to collaborate with publishers of all sizes, from large brands to small boutiques.

Confusion

No search engine is immune to the spread of misinformation, and Perplexity is no exception. To mitigate this risk, Chan explains, the company employs several strategies. For example, it uses a ranking system with over 50 different signals to determine which sources are most authoritative, prioritizing reliable and fact-checked sources.

It also includes citations for all answers, allowing users to verify the information themselves. Perhaps most appealing is that the system is supposedly designed to challenge questions that are practically unanswerable, clarifying that it is a tool for summarizing information, not for forming opinions.

Publishers like TIME are optimistic about this partnership, seeing it as an interesting experiment in creating a sustainable relationship between AI companies and traditional media.

However, the company acknowledges that its AI content detection system is not perfect. Relying on cross-referencing multiple sources, while helpful, doesn't necessarily guarantee accuracy—especially for breaking news or emerging topics, where misinformation may initially appear across multiple channels. The source documentation doesn't mention how the system handles such situations or the speed at which information is updated when corrections are released.

Another potential weakness is that while Perplexity focuses on citing "reliable" sources, there is no clear explanation of how reliable sources are determined or whether this process might introduce certain biases into the system.

Key point

There's an important detail: the revenue-sharing model only works when there's advertising – there's no compensation for the large amount of publisher content that Perplexity is currently using to provide generic answers.

While the company argues this is more sustainable than one-time payments, it means publishers are essentially providing free content until an advertiser pays for Perplexity, which is something publishers have no control over.

That's a relatively small slice of the pie for a company valued at $9 billion after its latest funding round, and the company's success depends on quality, up-to-date content from publishers and creators perhaps more than the company is willing to admit.

There's also a broader question about the dynamics of power. While Perplexity presents itself as a partner to publishers, in reality it's becoming the new gatekeeper for news content. Publishers may feel pressured to join the program simply to retain control of content, rather than for any beneficial outcomes.

Despite these concerns, Perplexity's approach stands out among AI companies because, at least, it attempts to forge lasting relationships with content creators. TIME's CEO, Mark Howard, seems optimistic, noting that this partnership aligns with their mission to provide trustworthy journalism while reaching new audiences.

The program's success may depend on how advertising revenue is actually realized and whether publishers see real value in the technological tools provided. Currently, it represents an interesting experiment in finding common ground between AI companies and traditional media.

Justine Roberts, CEO of Mumsnet, the UK's largest parenting forum and the firm currently pursuing legal action against OpenAI, commented: "Ensuring creators are fairly compensated for their content is not only the right thing to do – but it's essential for the future growth of the AI-generated content sector, which relies on a sustainable supply of high-quality, copyrighted, human-made work. Perplexity's Publishers Programme is a positive step toward a world where innovation and fairness can coexist."

Hoang Anh (according to Journalism.co.uk, Perplexity.ai)

Source: https://www.congluan.vn/mo-hinh-chia-se-doanh-thu-giua-ai-va-bao-chi-giai-phap-moi-hay-su-phu-thuoc-post333263.html