Press Story

The Guardian, Reuters, and the Independent are the top three sources for news on ChatGPT
Murky rules mean AI tools pay for and prioritise some outlets, exploit other content for free, or exclude sources that block access
IPPR urges government to help establish ‘collective licensing agreements’ between news organisations and AI companies

Popular AI tools used by millions to access news are drawing on a narrow and inconsistent range of sources, often sidelining the UK’s most trusted journalism and reshaping which voices are heard, according to new analysis from the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR).

The think tank analysed how four leading AI tools - ChatGPT, Google Gemini, Perplexity, and Google AI Overviews - respond to news queries, and found that the BBC, the UK’s most popular and trusted news outlet, was missing entirely from ChatGPT and Gemini, partly due to the murky rules governing this interaction.

Other major news outlets also received limited exposure on ChatGPT: The Telegraph was cited in just 4 per cent of answers, GB News in 3 per cent, the Sun in 1 per cent, and the Daily Mail in 0 per cent.

ChatGPT’s top source was the Guardian, which was used as a source in 58 per cent of responses, and linked to far more than any other outlet, followed by Reuters, the Independent, and the Financial Times.

However, Google AI overview used the BBC as a source of its answer for 52.5 per cent of news queries, and Perplexity used the public broadcaster for 36 per cent. The Guardian was the most common source used by Gemini (appearing in 53 per cent of answers).

The think tank says there are several reasons why AI companies source news inconsistently. Some publishers, such as the Guardian, have licensing agreements with firms that own AI products like ChatGPT, while others — including the BBC — have sought to block AI companies from accessing their content.

Last year, the BBC threatened legal action against Perplexity for using its content without permission. While ChatGPT appears to be respecting the BBC’s wishes, this comes at a cost to the public: the UK’s most popular and trusted news outlet is absent from the country’s most widely used AI tool.

IPPR says this editorialisation by AI companies is creating a new generation of winners and losers. The disproportionate use of some outlets over others risks narrowing the range of perspectives users are exposed to, potentially amplifying particular viewpoints or agendas without users’ knowledge.

Additionally, the rise of AI could have serious consequences for the financial sustainability of quality journalism. For example, when a Google AI Overview is present, Google users are almost half as likely to click on news links. News publishers have themselves predicted a 43 per cent reduction in traffic from search engines over the next three years, threatening advertising and subscription revenues, particularly where AI companies are reproducing content without payment in return.

The authors of the report say that AI is rapidly transforming the news ecosystem, and AI companies are quicky emerging as the new gatekeepers of the internet, dominating the way the public now consume news and information.

Given the importance of this to democracy, the government should seek to foster a healthy AI news environment now, before it is too late. To do so , the think tank recommends:

Making AI companies pay for the news they use, by requiring fair payment and collective licensing deals that ensure a wide range of publishers are included
Introducing clear, standardised “nutrition labels” for AI news so the public can see where AI answers come from and how they’re shaped
Using public funding to protect independent news in the age of AI, by backing a BBC-led public interest AI news service

Roa Powell, senior research fellow at IPPR, said:

“AI tools are rapidly becoming the front door to news, but right now that door is being controlled by a handful of tech companies with little transparency or accountability.

“When the UK’s most trusted news source can disappear entirely from AI answers, it’s a warning sign. If AI companies are going to profit from journalism and shape what the public sees, they must be required to pay fairly for the news they use and operate under clear rules that protect plurality, trust and the long-term future of independent journalism.”

Carsten Jung, associate director for economic policy and AI at IPPR, said:

“So far, much of AI policy has sought to accelerate AI development. But we are coming to a stage where we need to more deliberately steer AI policy towards socially beneficial outcomes.

“In the news space, we have the tools to ensure that AI does not damage the public sphere, and in fact improve the quality and diversity of information people access. But this won’t happen by itself – the government needs to shape it. We should learn the lessons from the past and shape emerging technologies before it is too late.”

Owen Meredith, CEO, News Media Association:

“As the report demonstrates, weakening UK copyright law would deprive publishers of reward and payment for the trusted journalism that enables AI to be accurate and up to date. The Government must end the uncertainty it has created, by ruling out any new text and data mining exception in their March reports.

“The CMA must also intervene swiftly to stop Google using its dominant position to force publishers to fuel its AI chatbots for free. Fair payment from the market leader is critical to a functioning licensing market and to preventing big tech incumbents from monopolising AI.”

ENDS

Roa Powell and Carsten Jung are available for interview

CONTACT

Liam Evans, head of news and media: 07419 365 334 l.evans@ippr.org

David Wastell, director of news and communications: 07921 403651 d.wastell@ippr.org

NOTES TO EDITORS

Advance copies of the report are available under embargo on request
Methodology: IPPR conducted a small-scale experiment, testing four AI tools’ performance across 100 randomly generated news queries and analysing over 2500 links. Google generated an AI overview for 61 out of 100 news queries so this smaller dataset was used for analysing the citation behaviour of Google AI Overviews. All personalization features were disabled for this research.
IPPR (the Institute for Public Policy Research) is the UK’s most influential think tank, with alumni in Downing Street, the cabinet and parliament. We are the practical ideas factory behind many of the current government’s flagship policies, including changes to fiscal rules, the creation of a National Wealth Fund, GB Energy, devolution, and reforms to the NHS. As an independent charity working towards a fairer, greener, and more prosperous society, we have spent almost 40 years creating tangible progressive change - turning bold ideas into common sense realities. www.ippr.org