It might seem that way. In reality, not so, because “bad”refers to writing that contains technical writing errors. By that definition, “good” writing should be any writing that does not make common writing mistakes. But that’s not how the word is understood by John Q. Public. If you ask any random person to tell you what “good writing” is, they would tell you it’s writing that they enjoy.
Also, writing can be “technically” correct, but dry and not interesting to read — which then makes it bad, even though it’s technically correct.
Sometimes, we need to work with public understanding. It’s like spam — there is a technical definition, but most people think it’s anything they don’t want in their inbox. They are incorrect, but they are the majority. Likewise, the definition of “good” writing. :)