Apple in Talks to Pay Publishers to Power AI-Enhanced Siri
Nashnova编辑部
Apple is negotiating multi-year deals with publishers to feed real-time news into an AI-upgraded Siri, offering a pay-per-use model instead of the flat licensing fees standard in the AI industry — a pricing shift that could reset how content rights are valued in the age of AI.
What does Apple want to feed Siri?
The Wall Street Journal reports Apple is in talks with multiple publishers for multi-year agreements to supply real-time news and information to an AI-powered Siri launching later this year.
This means → Siri is being repositioned from a utility assistant to a service that can cite real news sources when answering questions.
Apple's internal budget discussions have reached nine figures — at least $100 million — though how the money would be split among publishers remains undecided.
How does "pay-per-use" differ from the industry norm?
Apple is proposing a variable compensation model: publishers get paid only when their content is actually retrieved by the AI, not before.
The current industry standard is a flat licensing fee — AI companies pay a fixed sum for broad access, regardless of how much content is actually used.
In plain terms = the industry default is an "all-you-can-eat annual pass"; Apple wants to switch to "pay per dish." Publishers' concern is straightforward: if Siri call volumes stay low, revenue could fall far short of a guaranteed flat fee.
Why is Apple taking this route?
Apple's relationship with publishers is not new: it has partnered with them through Apple News+, its paid news service, since 2019.
That relationship has been rocky — some publishers later left the platform. In late 2024, Apple tested AI-generated news summaries, but the feature produced inaccurate headlines, alarming publishers and prompting Apple to shut it down.
This reflects a company that has already stumbled on AI content accuracy and is now approaching the copyright and quality problem more cautiously.
Can the deal actually get done?
The core sticking point is clear: whether publishers will accept pay-per-use and give up the security of guaranteed fixed income.
This means → for publishers, it is a risk calculation — if Siri usage surges, per-call payments could outpace a flat fee; if usage is modest, there is no revenue floor.
Apple has declined to comment. The outcome hinges on whether Apple can offer volume commitments or minimum guarantees that give publishers enough confidence to sign.
Content is for reference only, not financial advice.