In the ever-evolving world of artificial intelligence, the rivalry between Google and OpenAI has reached a fever pitch, reshaping how billions of people find information, create content, and even express nostalgia. Over the past year, the landscape has shifted dramatically, with viral AI-powered trends, legal battles, and a surge of new users changing the stakes for tech giants, publishers, and everyday internet users alike.
OpenAI’s ChatGPT, launched in 2022, has been at the forefront of this transformation. According to a recent National Bureau of Economic Research working paper, authored by OpenAI’s Economic Research team and Harvard economist David Deming, ChatGPT now boasts more than 700 million weekly users—roughly 10 percent of the world’s population. This staggering figure highlights just how quickly generative AI has become a fixture in daily life.
The study, which analyzed over 1.5 million user conversations from May 2024 to July 2025, paints a vivid picture of how people are using ChatGPT. As of July 2025, 24 percent of conversations focused on seeking information—up a notable 10 percent from the previous year. Practical guidance, information-seeking, and writing-related tasks now account for nearly 77 percent of all interactions. OpenAI, in a blog post on September 15, described these findings as evidence that AI is “creating real economic value that is increasingly central to people’s work and everyday lives.”
But the story doesn’t end with productivity and information. The data also reveals that only 30 percent of ChatGPT usage is work-related, with non-work conversations rising from 53 percent to 70 percent over the past year. The study found work-related use is higher among younger and more educated users—23 percent of messages from those under 26 are work-related, compared to just 16 percent for those over 66. OpenAI’s research suggests that while enterprise adoption is still in its infancy, individuals are finding personal and professional value in generative AI. “ChatGPT helps improve judgment and productivity, especially in knowledge-intensive jobs,” the company stated.
Yet, not all trends favor ChatGPT. The share of users seeking coding help dropped from 12 percent to just 5 percent between July 2024 and July 2025. OpenAI attributes this decline to the growing popularity of its API for programming and the rise of autonomous agents like Codex. Meanwhile, the use of ChatGPT for generating images and multimedia grew by only 5 percent—though there was a notable spike in April 2025, driven by a viral Ghibli-style AI image trend on social media.
While OpenAI’s chatbot has made significant inroads, it now faces a formidable challenger: Google Gemini. In mid-September 2025, Gemini’s ‘hug my younger self’ trend swept across social media, captivating millions with nostalgic polaroid-style images created by its Nano Banana feature. The tool, which allows users to generate realistic 4D portraits by combining childhood and present-day photos, quickly became a sensation on platforms like Instagram and X.
The numbers behind Gemini’s rise are nothing short of remarkable. Between August 26 and September 9, the app attracted over 23 million new users. During that same period, more than 500 million images were crafted using Nano Banana. By mid-September, Gemini had dethroned ChatGPT to become the most popular free app on both the Apple App Store and Google Play Store. According to Google Trends, the search term “google gemini photo” peaked as the trend went viral, with the highest interest coming from Indian states such as Gujarat, Maharashtra, Madhya Pradesh, Assam, and Jharkhand. Related searches—like “gemini ai trend” and “google gemini ai photo trend”—also surged, underscoring the global fascination with AI-powered creativity.
This viral success, however, is just one facet of Google’s broader AI ambitions. The company’s AI Overviews feature, which delivers AI-generated summaries at the top of search results, has become a flashpoint in the ongoing debate over the future of journalism. On September 16, 2025, Penske Media Corporation—owner of Rolling Stone, Variety, and Billboard—filed a lawsuit against Google, alleging that AI Overviews siphon off readers and revenue by providing answers without requiring users to click through to original articles.
Penske’s complaint is stark: affiliate revenue has dropped by more than a third since the rollout of AI Overviews, as users receive information directly from Google’s summaries rather than visiting publisher websites. This “zero-click search” effect, publishers argue, threatens the very foundation of digital journalism, which relies on page views and ad impressions to fund reporting. As the lawsuit contends, “Without that traffic, the business model falters.”
Google, for its part, rejects the accusation that AI Overviews undermine publishers. The company points out that its summaries include source links and claim they actually expand discovery by sending users to a wider mix of websites. Markham Erickson, Google’s vice president for public policy, told attendees at a New York AI summit that user preferences are shifting away from the old “10 blue links” model toward contextual overviews generated by AI. Google insists it is striving to maintain what it calls a “healthy ecosystem,” balancing innovation with the needs of publishers.
Yet, the lawsuit raises broader questions about market power and consent. Penske argues that Google’s dominance in search leaves publishers with little choice: allow their content to appear in AI Overviews or risk losing visibility entirely. Smaller publishers, in particular, say they lack the leverage to negotiate terms, raising concerns that the most powerful tech platforms are dictating the rules of journalism’s digital future. Regulators in Washington and Brussels are already watching closely, with potential implications for whether tech companies must license journalism for AI training and summaries.
The consequences of this battle could be profound. Industry analysts warn that if AI Overviews continue to grow unchecked, newsrooms may be forced to cut investigative projects, the diversity of voices could shrink, and transparency might weaken as AI summaries replace direct links to original reporting. For readers, the trade-off is subtle: search becomes faster and more efficient, but the nuanced reporting that underpins democracy risks being sidelined.
As the legal and technological showdowns play out, the world watches to see whether journalism can adapt to an AI-driven era—or whether the very platforms that promised to connect us will end up narrowing the flow of information. For now, one thing is clear: the way we search, create, and consume information is being rewritten in real time, with profound implications for the future of both technology and the public good.
