There is a distinction between "Liberty" and "License"
I've come up with a definition that I like. I think of poetry as a piece of short literature in which every single word is relevant and carefully chosen.
I can live with that as a definition, I think. I tend to want to insist on some sort of rhyme or meter but recognize that I'll not likely get my wish. The act of choosing relevant words should apply to all writing. It does not. Writing used to be rare, thus you see the carefully crafted letters and documents of two centuries ago that people now consider "formal" or "quaint". Even the early newspapers were written in a fashion that made you realize the author of each article was a "writer" and not simply someone spewing forth words. Sadly, we are being deluged with a plethora of words in newspapers, on the internet, and in the broadcast media. This deluge has so devalued the word that many people regard accurate spelling and correct grammar as traits of "old people".
Apparently the US is now a place where "free speech" means "freedom from consequences," too.
I have a standard rant on this topic. I'll spare you that and just point out that in the current climate of Political Correctness, people have so descended to playing "the blame game" that they have lost the distinction between liberty (The condition of being free to act, believe or express oneself as one chooses.) and license (Excessive freedom; lack of due restraint.).
I suppose being incensed about poetry is not that great a vice. This particular topic, however, leads me to so many others