Okay sure but would you say software is not about code? Yes of course people skills matter I get it but the baseline is still code, no? Isn't it then weird to say software is not about it but rather people?
In fact, my entire point of the critisim is that you can apply the concept to every profession and it will still be valid hence its a banal weird thing.
Saying being a manager or in marketing is about people makes 100x more sense than to say its about writing. Almost all jobs involve people so it applies universally.
But that doesn't mean software is not code. that is still a weird thing to say and wrong.
For most problems solvable in code, there are literally infinite valid code representations of possible solutions (at least in higher-abstraction languages, the space is much more bounded at the assembly level). If you consider the subset of those representations that result in sufficiently performant execution, does it really matter which one is running? This is where most programmers will start mentioning clean abstractions and readability and maintainability, but those are concerns of making the code understandable for people reading and modifying that code. The people are still the driving force.
I'm not arguing for slop here - I definitely care about code quality - but it's important to stay grounded in the reason that it matters: people.