Merriam-Webster’s announcement that “Slop” is the 2025 Word of the Year has struck a cultural nerve. The lexicographers define “slop” as “digital content of low quality that is produced usually in quantity by means of artificial intelligence.” This definition captures a growing frustration many internet users share — the overwhelming flood of AI-created material clogging up our feeds, search results, and even entertainment streaming services. The word serves as a pointed reflection of how artificial intelligence has not only transformed creative industries but also muddied the boundaries between genuine creativity and automated mimicry.
The Rise of AI Slop in Digital Culture
2025 has seen a dramatic rise in what’s now commonly referred to as “AI slop.” From fake movie trailers on video platforms to entire AI-generated music projects on streaming services, algorithmically produced content has spread faster than ever before. Platforms that once thrived on user originality now find themselves overflowing with synthetic material designed purely to capture clicks. Even food delivery platforms have dabbled in AI-generated marketing and menu descriptions, turning everyday online experiences into uncanny reflections of machine output.
On social media, AI slop has become so prevalent that distinguishing authentic human creation from digital imitation is increasingly difficult. Many users, especially older generations, unwittingly share AI-generated dog videos or fabricated celebrity clips believing they are real. This demonstrates how integrated — and insidious — machine-made content has become. It’s not just a harmless novelty; it’s reshaping how people understand media, truth, and creativity.
The Word’s Origins and Symbolism
Merriam-Webster’s explanation of “slop” connects language history with cultural critique. Originally meaning “soft mud” in the 1700s, “slop” later evolved to describe “food waste” or “pig feed” in the 1800s. The word eventually came to signify something worthless or inferior. Its wet, unpleasant sound makes it perfect for describing online refuse — the kind of content that seeps into everything and sticks around like digital grime. By repurposing “slop” to describe generative AI’s output, the dictionary has given society a linguistic tool to push back against the flood of low-effort machine material.
The mockery embedded within “slop” also reflects the public’s shifting mood toward AI-generated media. At first, these tools inspired excitement and curiosity. But as the novelty faded, many began recognizing the costs — creative homogenization, misinformation, and erosion of human artistry. Thus, “slop” doesn’t just describe AI output; it encapsulates disappointment in an era overwhelmed by quantity over quality.
Platforms Push Back Against the Flood
In response to growing criticism, many platforms have introduced measures to curb AI slop. TikTok now lets users limit the amount of AI-generated content in their feeds, while Pinterest offers similar options. Streaming services have also felt the pressure, as AI-created bands and fake artists occasionally slip through algorithms unnoticed. One notable case involved an AI imitation of a popular indie band that went undetected for weeks before being removed. Even YouTube has started incorporating safeguards, though ironically, it continues encouraging users to create with AI tools, further blurring the boundaries of authenticity.
Meanwhile, major tech companies like Google have integrated video-generation tools—such as Veo 3—into their ecosystems, framing them as creative aids rather than replacements. This duality reveals a broader industry tension: while users demand authenticity, corporations continue capitalizing on synthetic convenience and profitability. The question of balance remains unresolved.
How to Identify and Avoid AI Slop
To help users maintain a healthier relationship with online media, experts recommend the following approach:
– Look for linguistic anomalies or visual inconsistencies that suggest algorithmic generation.
– Verify unusual claims or unfamiliar sources before sharing.
– Adjust platform settings to reduce AI-generated recommendations.
– Support authentic creators and artists who disclose their creative process.
– Use browser or app extensions that flag synthetic or low-quality media.
This proactive awareness is crucial in an environment where slop can masquerade as original insight or artistry.
Word of the Year and Cultural Reflection
Merriam-Webster’s annual Word of the Year selection often captures the spirit of the times, and “slop” does this perfectly. It embodies both critique and awareness, acknowledging how digital creativity has become entangled with automation. The dictionary noted other popular terms this year, including *Gerrymander*, *Touch Grass*, *Performative*, *Tariff*, *Conclave*, and *Six Seven*. Each reflects a facet of contemporary discourse — from politics to mental health to internet vernacular — but none matches the sting and irony of “slop.”
Comparing AI Slop and Authentic Content
| Aspect | AI-Generated Slop | Authentic Human Content |
|---|---|---|
| Creation Method | Automated generation through prompts and datasets | Crafted by human skill, experience, and emotional context |
| Quality Control | Quantity-focused, often uncurated | Manually refined for meaning and impact |
| Purpose | Engagement farming and algorithmic reach | Personal expression, storytelling, or communication |
| Emotional Depth | Superficial mimicry of human tone | Authentic emotion and nuance |
The Broader Implications of “Slop”
Declaring “slop” as the word of the year acts as both a warning and a snapshot. It emphasizes that society’s digital environment has grown so saturated with machine-made text, video, and art that users must now actively defend authenticity. The conversation is no longer just about AI innovation — it’s about where humanity fits in a world flooded with synthetic creativity.
Whether 2025 marks the peak of AI slop or merely the beginning of a new era remains to be seen. What’s undeniable is that “slop” has become more than slang. It’s a linguistic mirror reflecting both our fascination with technology and our discomfort with its consequences. In that sense, Merriam-Webster’s choice is less about mockery and more about awareness — an invitation to rethink what we consume, share, and create in the digital age.
