Of all the current debates around AI, one critique has stayed with me: that it’s “flattening the bar.” Tools like ChatGPT, the argument goes, make everyone’s writing sound the same — generic, overly polished, stripped of nuance. The concern is real, and I share it.

When the same predictive engine shapes expression, something human can get lost: the irregular phrasing, the imperfect rhythm, the subtle cues of personality. The part of language that carries emotional originality, not just semantic clarity.

But it also made me wonder: Whose bar is being flattened? And how?

Because “flattening” doesn’t always mean lowering standards. Sometimes, it means redistributing access — widening the field of who gets to be heard.

I’ve also noticed a different kind of discomfort. One that isn’t really about writing quality at all, but about access. For a long time, “good writing” has been more than skill; it’s been a form of gatekeeping. Those who could speak and write fluently in the accepted language of power — clear, polished, professional —…