Scientific publishing is entering a turbulent transition rather than a terminal collapse, a dynamic captured in The Atlantic’s January 2026 article “Science Is Drowning in AI Slop” https://www.theatlantic.com/science/2026/01/ai-slop-science-publishing/685704/ The piece highlights how AI lowers the cost of producing fluent but low-quality or misleading research, overwhelming peer review and eroding trust. This feels new, but it is better understood as AI amplifying long-standing weaknesses: narrative plausibility, citation density, and prestige signals standing in for verification.

In the near term, this creates a noisy and uncomfortable phase. AI not only launders weak or outcome-engineered studies by polishing them, it also exposes how much questionable work already existed. Retractions, skepticism, and institutional anxiety increase. This phase delays reform because institutions instinctively defend existing processes—but it also makes their failure undeniable at scale.

The likely future is a shift from narrative-centric publishing to verification-centric science. As AI makes large-scale checking, replication, statistical forensics, and cross-paper analysis cheaper than traditional review, authority migrates from prose to data, code, and reproducible methods. Single papers matter less; replicated clusters matter more. What looks like breakdown today is better seen as a phase transition: the slow collapse of narrative authority and the emergence of evidence-first norms shaped as much for machine readers as for human ones.