I guess it depends on how it's used?

The existence of the word is of course unobjectionable. It has a good and specific meaning on its own!

It's in the way that it's too frequently used that begins -- as I see it -- to devalue human expression.

Designers and UX folk etc use content all the time because it's a precise and meaningful word for thinking about the relationship of form to content. That's a situation where "content" is a great word.

But when you start hearing entertainment C-suite folks talk about all the great "content" that's coming out of their film studio, that's where -- to my mind -- you're seeing "content" used to erase the singular nature and value of those works. They're not "content"; they're films, movies, shorts, documentaries -- the moving image.

I think the problem with my essay here, which you've put your finger on nicely here, is my use of "inherently". It's not correct to say that the word "content" inherently devalues human expression. It's the way it's used that, quite frequently, devalues human expression.

I think I'm gonna edit that phrase -- you've helped me see the imprecision of how I initially wrote it ...

thank you!