The rise of generative AI is urgently reshaping the global publishing landscape, as powerful chatbots undermine the traditional flows of traffic, revenue, and recognition on which news and book publishers depend. Recent research and first-hand industry accounts suggest this disruption could threaten the very existence of independent journalism worldwide, especially if Thai publishers and readers fail to adapt to this new reality.
Generative AI platforms—such as ChatGPT, Google’s AI Overviews, Claude, Grok, and Perplexity—can now summarize and answer questions about online articles and books, often by drawing on vast troves of written content without explicit permission from authors or publishers. According to a comprehensive study referenced in The Atlantic’s “The End of Publishing as We Know It,” Google’s AI Overviews feature alone has slashed website traffic from search results by over 34%. As a result, news providers reliant on digital traffic for advertising and subscriptions are experiencing dramatic declines in visitors, forcing staff layoffs at prominent outlets and sparking anxiety about the future of professional journalism (The Atlantic).
This development matters profoundly to Thai readers because access to trustworthy, diverse information is closely tied to the strength and sustainability of local news ecosystems. In Thailand, as elsewhere, publishers often depend on “general-interest” readers—those who discover news through search engines and social media rather than direct subscriptions. As more Thais turn to AI-powered assistants for news summaries instead of clicking through to the original reporting, local revenue models are collapsing, creating the risk that vital sources of public-interest journalism may disappear.
The Atlantic’s reporting highlights the existential concern shared by global and regional publishing executives. The vice chair of media at the company that publishes the UK’s Daily Mail told the magazine: “All publishers can see that Overviews are going to unravel the traffic that they get from search, undermining a key foundational pillar of the digital-revenue model. […] That is absolutely the fear. And my concern is it’s not going to happen in three or five years—I joke it’s going to happen next Tuesday.” The situation is similar for book publishers, especially those producing nonfiction and textbooks, who now face massive potential losses as chatbots replicate core informational content with ease.
In response, publishers are fighting on two fronts. First comes legal action: at least 12 lawsuits involving more than 20 publishers have been filed against AI firms for “scraping” and repurposing their content without fair compensation (The Atlantic). Outcomes remain uncertain, and the legal system’s slow pace could mean irreparable damage before any decisive ruling is reached. Second, some publishers are making deals with AI companies—sometimes licensing access to content, sometimes forming so-called “partnerships” for modest sums. However, these deals carry little transparency, lack industry standards, and rarely come close to offsetting lost revenue from shrinking readership.
The lack of clarity about what kinds of content improve AI models—and little power on the part of publishers to prevent AI scraping—has left them negotiating from a position of weakness. The Robots Exclusion Protocol, meant to block bots from crawling websites, is easily circumvented. Because training data are secret, publishers cannot even tell which AI companies have accessed their work. A director at a major academic press stated, “A solution that promises to help determine the fair value of specific human-authored content within the active marketplace for LLM training data would be hugely beneficial,” but none currently exists (The Atlantic).
For Thai publishers, the stakes are rising. The Bangkok Post, Matichon, and other Thai media have already reported declining digital ad revenues as Google and Meta/Facebook monopolize digital spending, a trend now intensified by the rise of AI summarization. Without robust legal protections or regional standards for AI training, Thai journalists and writers risk uncompensated exploitation of their work—just as global players do. Legal scholars cited in the article argue for mandatory disclosure of training data and compensation systems for creators, but no such measures have yet been enacted internationally or regionally.
The threat extends beyond newsrooms into book publishing. Nonfiction authors and educational publishers in Thailand, who produce work vital for schools and universities, now face an uncertain future as AI can quickly summarize textbooks or explain key concepts in response to student queries. This threatens traditional sales, complicates copyright enforcement, and may reduce incentives for Thai experts to publish new works. A study by Microsoft cited in the article underscores that high-authority references—many of which come from books and journalistic sources—are especially prized in AI training, yet rarely compensated at fair rates (The Atlantic).
Amid legal uncertainty, publishers around the world are looking to diversify income streams. The “creator economy” may offer some hope, as Thai journalists or authors with established audiences could migrate to platforms such as YouTube, TikTok, or paid newsletters. However, these models do not easily support the investigative, original reporting needed to hold power to account—work that is time-consuming, costly, and often risky in the Thai context due to longstanding challenges for press freedom.
The major AI companies show little indication of waiting for traditional publishers to catch up. While industry figures occasionally call for “new deals” or opt-in protocols for content use, in practice, chatbots continue to learn from and imitate existing content—styles, facts, and analysis—without meaningful reward or even an effective opt-out for individual writers. The Atlantic describes how even proposed “micropayment” systems for creators remain vaporware, while legal and regulatory debates drag on.
Historically, Thai publishing has weathered technological change, from the arrival of the internet to the rise of social media and the digitization of advertising. However, generative AI introduces a degree of automation, scale, and opacity that outpaces previous disruptions. As academic, news, and cultural output are scraped and synthesized by AI, questions of authority, authenticity, and copyright grow more pressing. In Thailand’s diverse cultural landscape—with regional dialects, local histories, and unique legal challenges—loss of publisher-led curation could mean increased misinformation and loss of trust in news overall.
Looking to the future, the risk is not merely to publishers’ bottom lines but to the very ecosystem that supports informed citizenship. Without effective regulation and innovation in business models, a “mass extinction” of local media and book publishing is possible—leaving AI companies to synthesize and distribute the news and knowledge that shape society (The Atlantic). If media outlets vanish, AI will ultimately have fewer original human voices to learn from, diminishing content quality and diversity for all.
To safeguard the future, Thai publishers, writers, and policymakers must proactively develop new approaches. This may include:
- Demanding government and industry action to formulate guidelines on AI’s use of copyrighted materials, with enforceable transparency and compensation requirements.
- Exploring hybrid funding models—such as memberships, events, or educational services—to supplement traditional revenue.
- Investing in public awareness about the origins of news and the risks of relying solely on AI summarization for information needs.
- Supporting coalitions among regional publishers to negotiate collectively with global platforms and AI firms.
- Encouraging the Thai government to update copyright law to clarify the status of content scraped for AI training and establish protocols for enforcement.
For everyday Thai readers and students, the immediate recommendation is to remain vigilant about the sources of information and to support original journalism and books where possible. While AI chatbots offer speed and convenience, human-authored content remains essential for understanding nuanced, localized, or investigative topics—especially those that affect Thai society.
For the full story and data, see The Atlantic’s article, “The End of Publishing as We Know It” (theatlantic.com).