Can Google really thrive without an open web?

What does 'open ecosystem' really mean for Google?

When Sullivan speaks of the open ecosystem, he refers to a web where content is freely accessible, indexable, and where the flow of information is not hindered by closed gardens. This includes sites that publish freely accessible content, that use open standards (semantic HTML, Schema.org), and that allow crawling without abusive barriers.

The paradox? Google itself creates closed experiences through featured snippets, Knowledge Panels, and AI Overviews that capture traffic before it even reaches the source sites. Thus, this statement resembles a reminder of mutual dependence—Google needs content to index, while publishers need visibility.

Why is Google emphasizing this interdependence now?

This stance comes in a context of increasing web fragmentation. Social networks, closed apps, and paid platforms (Substack, Patreon, Discord) capture a growing share of attention and original content. If this trend accelerates, Google loses its raw material: indexable and linkable content.

Sullivan reminds us that Google's interest aligns with that of traditional web publishers. However—and this is where it gets tricky—Google's recent practices (zero-click searches, SGE synthesizing without sending traffic) contradict this beautiful statement. There is a discernible gap between rhetoric and reality.

What implications does this have for an SEO practitioner?

Concretely, this statement suggests that focusing on openness and interoperability remains a viable long-term strategy. Publishing freely accessible content, structuring your data with Schema.org, facilitating crawling, contributing to the web's network through quality outgoing links—all of this should, in theory, benefit both Google and your visibility.

But beware: this strategy works only if Google continues to reward the open ecosystem. However, signals are mixed. Sites that depend solely on SEO have seen their traffic drop with the arrival of AI Overviews, while closed platforms are thriving. Therefore, diversification is key—SEO is essential, but it shouldn't be the only focus.

• The open ecosystem refers to a web that is accessible, indexable, and based on open standards.
• Google claims that its prosperity depends on this ecosystem—but its own products (featured snippets, SGE) undermine it.
• For SEOs, this means continuing to invest in accessibility, structured data, and networking—while diversifying channels.
• This statement must be viewed in light of Google's actual practices, which increasingly favor direct answers without clicks.
• Web fragmentation (apps, social media, paywalls) threatens traditional indexing and pushes Google to reaffirm its dependence on open content.

Does this statement align with observed practices on the ground?

Let's be honest: no, not really. If Google truly depends on the open ecosystem, why is it heavily investing in formats that bypass source sites? The featured snippets have reduced the organic CTR of position 1 from 26% to less than 20% on average. The AI Overviews synthesize answers without systematically sending traffic back.

This statement feels like a principle reminder—Google knows it can’t completely eliminate publishers without killing its own data source. But in practice, it constantly tests how far it can go without provoking a massive revolt. The discourse aligns with openness, while the product choices head in the opposite direction.

What nuances should we consider in this statement?

The interdependence between Google and the open web exists, but it is asymmetrical. Google can survive partial web fragmentation—it has YouTube, Gmail, Maps, Android. Traditional web publishers, however, are heavily reliant on Google traffic. This asymmetry of power makes Sullivan's statement somewhat… optimistic.

Another nuance: the open ecosystem Google refers to does not necessarily include the entire web. Niche sites, forums, and small independent publishers are becoming less visible, favoring large platforms (Reddit, Quora, LinkedIn). Google effectively promotes an open yet consolidated web, where a few players capture most of the traffic. [To be verified]: Does Google really measure the health of the open ecosystem, or does it merely monitor its own growth metrics?

In what cases does this rule not apply?

This interdependence does not play out the same way for all sectors. Transactional queries (e-commerce, local services) still generate clicks because Google has no interest in capturing everything—it prefers to monetize through Google Ads and Google Shopping. However, on informational queries, Google can afford to absorb everything within the SERPs.

Sites that monetize via programmatic advertising are the most vulnerable. Those with alternative revenue models (subscriptions, courses, SaaS, qualified affiliates) are less dependent on mass traffic and can better withstand the erosion of organic CTR. Sullivan's statement applies particularly to pure-play publishers who have not diversified their traffic and revenue sources.

What practical steps should I take to align with this vision?

First action: optimize your site's technical accessibility. Facilitate crawling by cleaning your robots.txt, correcting redirect chains, and reducing the number of orphan pages. The easier your content is to index, the more you contribute to the open ecosystem—and the more you maximize your chances of visibility.

Second lever: invest in structured data. Schema.org is not just a tool for rich snippets—it’s a common language that allows Google (and other engines) to understand your content unambiguously. Sites that structure their data well are better positioned to appear in enhanced answers, Knowledge Panels, and even future AI experiences.

What mistakes should I avoid in this context?

Classic mistake: blocking crawling to 'protect' your content. Some publishers panic in the face of AI Overviews and try to limit Googlebot’s access. Wrong move: you exit the open ecosystem and lose all organic visibility. If you want to limit AI use of your content, use specific tags (Google-Extended user-agent), not a blanket block.

Another trap: retreating to closed platforms (Medium, LinkedIn, Substack) while abandoning your site. These platforms have their uses for distribution but don't belong to you. Keep your owned site as the central hub, and use the platforms as relays. The open ecosystem is one where you control your URLs and your destiny.

How can I check if my site positively contributes to the open ecosystem?

Regularly audit your crawl accessibility via Google Search Console. Check that your important pages are indexed, that there are no unintentional blockages, and that your sitemaps are up to date. A site that isn’t crawled doesn’t exist in the open ecosystem.

Then, analyze your outbound link profile. A site that never links externally is a dead end. Contributing to the open ecosystem means citing your sources, linking to complementary resources, and participating in the web's networking. Google observes these signals—a site generous in quality outbound links sends a signal of editorial credibility.

• Audit and optimize your crawlability (robots.txt, redirects, orphans)
• Implement Schema.org structured data on your key content
• Do not block Googlebot—use Google-Extended if you want to limit AI
• Keep your owned site as the central hub, and the platforms as relays
• Integrate quality outbound links to contribute to the web network
• Monitor your indexing via Search Console and quickly correct anomalies