Google Is Using AI to Mess With Headlines (Again)

Back in December, news outlets spotted Google messing with headlines on articles that appeared in Discover. As it happens, this was Google experimenting with AI-generated headlines; rather than show readers the headlines the outlets wrote themselves, Google's AI would take it upon itself to rewrite them. Why? According to Google, it was a "small UI experiment for a subset of Discover users" that "changes the placement of existing headlines to make topic details easier to digest." While those of us that actually write headlines would argue such an experiment isn't really necessary, Google apparently disagrees, as the experiment is now a feature.

Articles in Google Search may be impacted by AI

The thing is, Google isn't content with keeping AI-generated headlines exclusive to Discover. As spotted by The Verge, the company is now expanding its AI rewrites to Google Search as well. That means if you click an article on a Google Search page, it might have had a headline that the publication had no input on. Of course, when you click through to the actual article, you'll see the real headline. Once again, Google says this is an experiment-a "small" and "narrow" one at that, and that, in its current state, the feature isn't ready for a full rollout. But The Verge says it has spotted multiple examples of Google taking its articles and changing the headlines for Search.

For example, the AI turned the headline "I used the 'cheat on everything' AI tool and it didn't help me cheat on anything" into "'Cheat on everything' AI tool." Sure, the article is about the "Chat on everything" tool, but the AI version leaves out some serious context: The Verge isn't just spotlighting this tool, or, worse yet, endorsing it; it's heavily criticizing it-something the original headline was designed to advertise to readers. In another example, You can't replace the battery in Lego's Smart Bricks - and many of its sensors aren't active yet" was changed to "You can't replace the battery in Lego's Smart Bricks." At least this one doesn't reframe the story, but it does leave out part of the story entirely. Finally, there's I met Olaf - the Frozen robot who might be the future of Disney Parks," which Google's AI awkwardly truncated to "the Frozen robot who might be the future of Disney Parks." Yes, the "the" is lowercase in Search, for some reason.

Why is Google doing this?

The Verge acknowledges that Google has changed far fewer headlines in Search than it has in Discover, which means the chances are much lower that you'll encounter an AI headline in a Google Search than scrolling through the Discover feed. But if the feature's journey in Discover is any indication, Google will only ramp up AI-generated headlines in Search in the near future.

Google told The Verge that the goal is to identify content on a page that would be a useful and relevant title to a users' query," and apply better matching titles to users' queries and facilitating engagement with web content." This experiment is apparently not specific to news articles, and that, if Google were to launch such a feature, it wouldn't use generative AI to rewrite the headlines. So, why use generative AI to rewrite the headlines in the experiment? To that point, The Verge says that sometimes, Google's AI uses its headline, but the wrong version. Outlets like The Verge will sometimes produce two versions of a headline: one for the website, and one that appears on Search. Google's AI will reportedly swap the headlines, choosing the site headline for Search when The Verge wrote an entire headline designed for Search.

Google Search belongs to Google, of course, and we're all at the company's mercy when it comes to what appears in those results. But it seems a bit beyond the pale to change a website's headline when ranking it in Search, whether that be cutting off half the angle, or changing the angle entirely. If readers click through thinking they're getting one thing, and find another, who's that good for? I guess Google thinks it's good for them, but, like many of the changes the company has made in recent years, it isn't really good for anyone else.