Three Reasons AI-Powered Search Results Might Be a Bad Idea

[bill.indggo]

Three Reasons AI-Powered Search Results Might Be a Bad Idea

Search engines like Google are increasingly using AI-generated summaries and suggestions at the top of their search results. These are likely based on distilling vast amounts of high-quality content from across the internet and other sources.

But what are the risks if this approach becomes the standard for all search tools?

1. New and Original Content May Be Buried
AI-generated results often rely on existing content. This makes it harder for new or original material to surface and gain attention, potentially discouraging fresh contributions.

2. The Connection Between Searchers and Content Creators Is Lost
When AI presents a summary, users are less likely to visit the original source. This weakens the link between the searcher and the content creator—who might be an expert worth engaging with. It also reduces opportunities for creators to earn income from their work.

3. Critical Evaluation of Sources Becomes Difficult
Summaries limit the ability to assess who wrote the original content and whether they are credible. That judgment is left entirely to the AI, which may carry biases—especially if profit motives influence which sources are highlighted.

Bonus Concern: Loss of Context
Sometimes, the meaning of a piece depends heavily on its context or point of view. An AI-generated summary may misinterpret or overlook that nuance, leading to misunderstanding.

What We Might Be Giving Up

AI-generated summaries may seem like a shortcut to information, but they come at a cost. They risk burying new voices, detaching us from the people behind the content, and filtering meaning through a machine that may not understand nuance. As this becomes the norm, we should question not just what we’re gaining—but what we’re quietly losing in the process.