Merriam-Webster chose slop as the 2025 word of the year. This selection is a direct call-out to AI-generated content, which at times has questionable quality and accuracy. In some contexts, AI slop can be funny—it’s overly cheesy, with ridiculous phrasing or wildly inaccurate digital imagery.
But at other times, AI slop is dangerous mis- or disinformation, used to fan the flames of controversy and spark a public reaction—like deepfakes depicting politicians or celebrities saying things they never actually said.
Merriam-Webster’s decision to appoint slop the word of the year is consistent with its famously cheeky online presence. But it also speaks to the very real threat of AI-generated content and the imperative for users to discern fact from fiction.
The more attuned our slop radar, the better communicators we can be. Our roles as comms professionals are multi-faceted. We keep a constant pulse on the news; we dig deep into client strategy and align it with the media; we excel at multitasking. We also need to understand how language and communications evolve over time.
What’s in a word?
The word slop (with its original meaning) has been around for more than 300 years, but it’s only in the past few years that society has begun using it to describe poor-quality digital content. Some might be surprised that Merriam-Webster is updating the definition of slop to include this popularized meaning, but dictionaries are frequently updated with new words or definitions. They’re living, breathing reference documents that evolve alongside society’s natural language progression. Other new entries to Merriam-Webster include rizz, dad bod, adulting, and doomscroll—terms we all know from pop culture and social media.
As comms professionals, we have the unique privilege and responsibility of keeping a pulse on modern language. This isn’t to say that we should recommend clients use verbiage that would be performative or disingenuous to their brand, but we do have a role to play in shaping how people discover and learn about new terms and concepts.
Education is a big component of thought leadership. When we’re pitching ideas to journalists, we’re often saying, “Nobody is talking about this but here’s what it means and why it matters.” Think about greenwashing, machine learning, and digitization. These formerly niche concepts are so much more prevalent today than they were 10 years ago, thanks in part to journalism and thought leadership. For better or worse, slop is now part of the mainstream.
Stand out from the slop.
One thing is clear: our work as comms professionals matters now more than ever. There’s no shortage of AI slop, and most publications don’t want to go near it with a 10-foot pole. Even if they’re not using AI detection tools, most journalists are savvy enough to recognize it. They still want authentic, human-generated content that resonates with audiences.
Tech reporter Maria Korolov recently wrote about AI-generated content on LinkedIn. She provided fictional examples of what AI- versus human-generated content looks like and expressed a strong preference for the latter, specifically citing the sterility and genericness of AI content.
Which cheese is better?
AI content: “There is no single “best” cheese, as the ideal choice depends on factors like nutrition, flavor, and intended use. For overall health, options like cottage cheese, gouda, and Parmesan are frequently recommended for their high protein, calcium, and other nutrients, while others like Swiss cheese are a good choice for those monitoring sodium intake. For flavor, popular choices include aged Parmigiano Reggiano and cheddar, and for cooking, mozzarella, provolone, and cheddar are excellent for melting.”
Human content: “You have to be careful about where you get your cheese,” says Joe Schmoe, chef at Schmoe’s Restaurant. “Last year, we had a shipment of Gouda come in that made everyone throw up. We spent thousands on advertising trying to undo the bad publicity. I’ll never use vendor XYZ again.”
The AI content reads like a Wikipedia page, whereas the human content is original—something only Joe Schmoe could have produced. Korolov (and most journalists) would much rather have authentic, quirky, human-generated content than something written entirely by ChatGPT.
Executives are under a lot of pressure; they may be tempted to use AI to tidy up their messaging. And, as mentioned, generative AI can be a helpful editor, pointing out potential areas for improvement. But if executives use it to write all their content, what often happens is that the tool “polishes” their original idea into something beyond recognition. The result is too clean, too perfect; it doesn’t feel real.
Thought leadership works best when it’s unique and authentic. Anyone can use generative AI to produce a canned piece of commentary. Only our clients can speak from their unique vantage point with their individual voices.
In 2026, let’s encourage them to stand out from the slop and embrace their perfectly imperfect, one-of-a-kind messaging. As we kick off the new year, here are a few things comms professionals should keep in mind:
- Talk to your clients about how they use generative AI, especially in content generation.
- Encourage them to include unique anecdotes in their messaging to support their storytelling and differentiate their POV.
- Review all AI outputs not just for accuracy but for overall flow and vibe. Does it read like a human wrote it?
- Take pride in your role. We’re on the front lines of language, communication, and the generation of new ideas. Enjoy the wild ride!