Merriam-Webster picks 'slop' as 2025 word of the year, highlighting AI-era content concerns

Merriam-Webster on Monday named 'slop' the 2025 word of the year, a term the editors say captures a surge of digital content that is often creepy, zany and demonstrably fake — typically produced at scale by artificial intelligence. The choice reflects a year in which AI-generated material saturated social feeds and sparked debate about credibility, copyright and the boundaries between imagination and manipulation.

"It's such an illustrative word," Merriam-Webster president Greg Barlow told The Associated Press in an exclusive interview ahead of the year’s announcement. "It’s part of a transformative technology, AI, and it’s something that people have found fascinating, annoying and a little bit ridiculous." The word’s rise comes as the public and researchers increasingly distinguish between authentic expression and low-quality AI output.

The dictionary defines slop as "digital content of low quality that is produced usually in quantity by means of artificial intelligence." In the definition’s echo, Barlow described slop as a spectrum: content that can feel like junk yet is produced by systems that are supposed to magnify human creativity. The term’s visceral imagery — from mud to a chaotic trough — also resonates with concerns about what is legitimate and what is merely noise in a media ecosystem increasingly driven by algorithms.

The word’s examples are concrete: absurd videos, bizarre advertising images, cheesy propaganda and fake news that looks real — all frequently attributed to AI generation. Critics warn that such material can mislead the public, distort political discourse and complicate the work of journalists and researchers attempting to verify authenticity. In recent months, AI-generated clips have extended to public figures, raising questions about rights, consent and the potential for misrepresentation.

The discourse around slop has also touched political and security spheres. In a notable instance last month, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth posted a manipulated image of a beloved cartoon turtle reimagined as a grenade-wielding fighter, a posting framed by some as a defense of U.S. military actions in Venezuela. Separately, a Canadian animated show known for teaching preschoolers kindness and inclusivity was cited by critics who warned that AI-era manipulation could stretch into children’s programming if used irresponsibly.

Barlow said the word’s edge — the sense of dread that AI can generate convincing but misleading content — also carries a kernel of hope. He argued that the spike in searches for slop signals people are increasingly seeking content they deem real and genuine. "It’s almost a defiant word when it comes to AI. When it comes to replacing human creativity, sometimes AI actually doesn’t seem so intelligent."

To select the word of the year, Merriam-Webster editors review data about which words have risen in search results and usage, then reach a consensus on the term that best captures the year’s zeitgeist. Barlow described the process as a reflective task: the editors aim to mirror the public mood, filtering out words that are perennial top lookups in favor of a term that embodies a moment in time.

“We like to think that we are a mirror for people,” Barlow said. The word of the year, he noted, is not simply the most-searched term but the one that best frames the confluence of culture, technology and everyday life during the period in question. That balancing act helps explain why a word tied to controversy and controversy-friendly imagery would rise to the top in a year dominated by rapid advances in AI.

The Merriam-Webster selection is part of a broader lexicographic update. The dictionary recently released a fresh edition that adds more than 5,000 new words, a rare revision aimed at reimagining one of its most widely used dictionaries while reflecting changes in how people communicate today.

The year’s other top lookups reveal a pattern in which the lexicon tracks societal tensions and evolving digital practices. In a running list the publisher displays, polarization was the 2024 word of the year, followed by 2023’s authentic, 2022’s gaslighting, 2021’s vaccine and 2020’s pandemic, among others. The sequence underscores how Merriam-Webster uses annual selection to map recurring themes while highlighting terms that crystallize public discourse.

Beyond the crown term, analysts note that the lexicon’s yearly roll call increasingly intersects with technology and AI literacy. Some words rise in searches because people encounter them in media or on social platforms, while others gain traction as people seek to name the dynamics shaping online life, from misinformation to the ethics of machine-generated content. This year’s edition also includes curiosities that illustrate how search trends can spike for reasons beyond broad social issues — a reminder that lexicography often captures spontaneous shifts in attention as much as enduring concerns.

The discussion around slop dovetails with a broader industry reckoning about content quality in an AI-enabled era. Experts stress that while AI can accelerate production and creativity, it also challenges standards for truthfulness, attribution and accountability. Media organizations, platforms and educators are increasingly emphasizing verification, source context and digital literacy as antidotes to the flood of AI-assisted material that may be compelling yet misleading.

The word of the year tradition, now in its 22nd year, continues to reflect how people use language to interpret a rapidly changing information environment. As AI tools become more accessible and more capable, the term slop may become a reference point in discussions about how to differentiate authentic content from what is generated or curated by machines. In that sense, the choice is as much about cultural self-awareness as it is about vocabulary.

In sum, Merriam-Webster’s 2025 word of the year captures a moment when technology’s reach has stretched into every corner of digital life, prompting both trepidation and resilience. The editors’ message is clear: people want content that feels real, and language itself can be a barometer for that demand.