Google vs Brussels: AI Mode, the Android fine, and the EU’s Digital Markets Act

“If a banana tells a joke and nobody hears it, does that banana exist?” asks Banana Joe, alone in the supermarket, in an episode of The Amazing World of Gumball-a series broadcast in more than 100 countries across every continent, quietly shaping the neurons of Generation Alpha (the first generation that is entirely 21st century).

That gag prompts a slightly more grown-up version of the same puzzle: if someone opens Google this morning, types “What did the European Court decide about Google’s fine?” and gets a good-enough reply in AI Mode, are they then going to click through to Expresso, Reuters, or the Financial Times to read more?

Probably not. And at that point, it is almost as though Expresso, Reuters, or the Financial Times do not exist.

So yes-this is a bigger issue than a mere “existential crisis” for Madeira bananas.

From Banana Joe to Google’s AI Mode

Google’s own data indicates that AI-powered search is growing quickly and reshaping how we interact with online content. For roughly 25 years, the pattern has been fairly stable: I search with a few keywords → Google shows a list of links → I click what looks relevant → adverts appear, funding a sizeable slice of the digital economy.

With AI Mode and AI Overview, the journey changes: I ask a question → an AI-generated answer appears → and only if I am especially interested do I open one or two links to dig deeper.

Most people stop at the AI answer. That creates a direct challenge for the internet’s traditional business model: the more complete the AI response becomes, the fewer reasons there are to click on search results.

If the AI does its job too well, the user is satisfied immediately. They do not open other links, websites lose traffic, and the economic model that supports a large share of digital content comes under strain. It is a domino effect that can hit the whole online ecosystem and, in particular, the news media.

AI Overview, clicks, and why journalism is now competing for trust

For years, news organisations published online on the assumption that people would discover their links via search engines and arrive at their sites. For two decades, the fight was largely for clicks. In the AI era, the real competition is increasingly for trust.

If a user wants verified information, needs to understand a complex topic, wants to follow an investigation, or is looking for different viewpoints across a wide range of issues, there will still be a place for journalism.

When tragedy strikes, that is easy to see: almost everyone values what journalists do. On ordinary days, we tend to take it for granted.

But the main risk is not that AI will replace journalists. It is that journalists will lose the day-to-day conditions needed to do their work-work that requires time, contact with other human beings, and above all critical thinking.

The financial independence of the media matters, and in the AI era it will not simply fall from the sky.

Society needs to understand why preserving credible, professional information is essential in a digital environment that is becoming ever more automated. The question is: how?

The European Union has an important role here. Right now, Google still displays links and sources within AI Overviews and AI Mode. But nobody can say what the balance will look like-between AI-generated answers and traffic sent to publishers’ sites-over the coming months and years.

AI is changing how we buy products, look for information, discover services, and make decisions. As consumers, we adjust quickly to new technology. As citizens-and as societies, companies, institutions, and governments-we do not move at the same pace.

In Portugal, the government has just unveiled Amália, a Portuguese-language LLM. The initiative matters, yet it still leaves the impression that we are watching the film in slow motion. In technology, three years can feel like three decades-or more.

Google vs Brussels: the Android fine and the EU’s Digital Markets Act

But back to the “banana” of the day-Google vs Brussels.

Google has long been, by a wide margin, the most-used search engine in the world. That dominance did not happen by chance: in 2015, the European Commission opened a formal investigation amid suspicions that the company was imposing conditions on Android smartphone manufacturers to protect and strengthen its grip on online search.

One example: it required devices to come with Google Search, the Chrome browser, and the Google Play Store pre-installed.

The Commission’s reasoning was straightforward: if almost every Android handset already shipped with Google’s services out of the box, it became far harder for rivals to win users.

In 2026, how many people use other search engines? Exactly.

As a result of that case, a record fine of €4.34 billion was imposed in 2018. Google appealed, as expected.

In 2022, a European court upheld most of the investigation’s findings but reduced the penalty to €4.1 billion. This Thursday, 2 July, it was reported that the Court of Justice of the European Union confirmed that decision.

More than a decade after the investigation began, one of the biggest regulatory battles between the European Union and a technology giant is now closing.

Why does it matter?

Because the case has become emblematic of Europe’s strategy to curb the power of Big Tech. The ruling bolsters the EU’s authority to step in when it believes a dominant platform is using its position to skew competition.

The €4.1 billion figure matters, but the deeper issue is the right to set the rules of Europe’s digital market.

For Alphabet, Google’s parent company, a fine equal to a little over 1% of annual revenue is an ant. What it really signals is that new rules could force Google to change how it distributes search, advertising, and AI use-and that could carry a far larger economic impact in the long run.

JB: Woolf, in recent years Google has racked up around €11 billion in antitrust fines in Europe. That barely dents the company’s finances, but the scrutiny triggered by the Digital Markets Act is significant. Do you agree? Give me a brief answer based on credible sources and explain in a few words what this EU strategy is and whether it protects European citizens.

Yes, I agree.

The roughly €11 billion in antitrust fines accumulated by Google in Europe is only a small fraction of Alphabet’s financial scale. The Android fine now confirmed (€4.1 billion) amounts to a little over 1% of the company’s annual revenue, so the financial hit is entirely absorbable.

What may matter more is the Digital Markets Act (DMA). With this legislation, the European Union moved beyond acting only after identifying abuses and began imposing preventative rules on the largest digital platforms-so-called gatekeepers.

In plain terms, the EU’s approach is to:

• stop dominant platforms from favouring their own services;
• make it easier for competitors to enter the market;
• reduce Big Tech’s power over users and businesses;
• ensure innovation is not dependent on rules set by a single platform.

The DMA’s logic is directly linked to protecting European citizens. The aim is more choice, stronger competition, and less reliance on one company to access information, apps, services, or digital markets. By limiting practices that privilege a platform’s own products, the EU is seeking to protect consumers, businesses, and the pluralism of the digital ecosystem.

Put simply: fines punish past behaviour; the DMA tries to prevent it happening again.

JB: In Brussels, today is a day of celebration. Big Tech still holds enormous power, but it knows that in Europe it cannot single-handedly set the rules of the digital market.

Now it matters that governments, businesses, and citizens debate these shifts with the same urgency as the shifts themselves. The media is trying to do that, but it needs support. In the AI era, the wind blows hard and changes direction constantly.

One thing is certain: while we lose time to the occasional social-media video, the technology giants are already testing new ways to capture-and dominate-our attention.