Do you disagree? It could have been better worded I guess. It doesn't really make it very clear that it is talking about those writers who more or less dismiss a songwriting process without investigating or trying, often misunderstanding it to be something cold and clinical.
Reading it again the article is also too absolute in defining the reasons some writers feel that way, and has missed out a couple of important cases in the list, with no real explanation. Also the last list should perhaps use or instead of and.
Over the years I've met and spoken to many writers who not only don't think they use a process, haven't tried a process, but have pretty well slammed process or frameworks as unartistic or something distasteful, commercial or something you do when you sell out. True, using process can be useful when writing commercially, but it doesn't have to be. Writers often use some elements without necessarily thinking they have a process. Process can be both flexible and personal. It isn't something to fear.
Usually, in conversation I've found that often the writers that felt that way misunderstood what process was and what process could do to help them, or they simply weren't aware of tools they could use or that they generally already approached writing songs with a fairly informal process but didn't realise they did.
I've seen numerous young writers on these forums, and others, trying to get as many songs written as possible while avoiding any editing citing some of the reasons mentioned in the article, including mentioning both their own ignorance of what they could do and admitting editing and focusing just seemed too much like work and they couldn't be bothered... they would far prefer to move on to the next song. Fair enough. It is a complacency that does them no favours which is why the article discusses all that.
As it is currently expressed however it does sound more arrogant and condescending than helpful! Even expressing it in this reply I've been clumsy. Time for an edit. lol
