@simon yes!

However, I'm concerned by how few people replying understand this suggestion. Publications are time-intensive for people to write.

The marketing blurb for a book? The average person reads it within seconds. Writing an appropriately appealing one takes hours.

A news article? Minutes to read. Hours to write.

An ESL reader won't take longer to go through a short story than the author did unless the reader is looking up most of the words in a dictionary or another reference. Even then, it's iffy. That's assuming the author wasn't building an original world, uncommon character, or new technique for days or weeks beforehand.

A line of alt text for an online image generally requires thought and a few tries to be well written. Screen readers don't see that effort.

The difference in time requirements for anything more serious than a casual chat text is huge. (As for casual chat... what good are the words of a digital robot?)

That's partly why algorithm-generated writing is so dangerous to publishers. It pushes out human writers who can't or who refuse out of artistic/journalistic integrity to keep up with unrealistic demands.

Expecting a publication to be written inhumanly fast is beyond rude. That dehumanizing of writers is destroying authors' will to publish anything of importance.