On its website, Grammarly said the feature “drew on insights from subject-matter experts and trusted publications” and produced suggestions using publicly available material. In the blog post announcing the tool, the company wrote that the “Expert Review agent offers subject-matter expertise and personalized, topic-specific feedback to elevate writing that meets rigorous academic or professional standards tailored to the user’s field.”
The feature drew criticism after Wired reported that the system was producing AI-generated edits attributed to real writers and academics, including individuals who had never authorized their involvement. Critics said the assistant generated guidance in the names of experts who had no connection to the product.
Platformer founder Casey Newton, whose name appeared in the system, wrote that Grammarly “curated a list of real people, gave its models free rein to hallucinate plausible-sounding advice on their behalf, and put it all behind a subscription.”
Other scholars reacted after seeing their identities listed. Historian Mar Hicks wrote on Bluesky, “You can’t just steal people’s IP and then pretend they’re saying something they never said.”
Grammarly’s documentation included a disclaimer stating that references to experts “are for informational purposes only and do not indicate any affiliation with Grammarly or endorsement by those individuals or entities.” However, the same documentation also said the feature provided “insights from leading professionals, authors, and subject-matter experts.”
The controversy deepened after Grammarly said authors could contact the company to request removal from the system. Critics said the opt-out approach was insufficient because many people were never informed that their identities had been used in the first place.
Reports also indicated that the system referenced deceased figures such as astronomer Carl Sagan and scholar bell hooks. Researcher Sarah J. Jackson reacted online, writing, “So Grammerly is violating the memory of bell hooks AND making AI versions of the rest of us before we’re even dead.”
Grammarly has since taken down the Expert Review feature while the legal challenge proceeds. The dispute underscores rising scrutiny around how AI tools reference real people and public writing when generating automated feedback.
This analysis is based on reporting from WIRED.
Image courtesy of Grammarly.
This article was generated with AI assistance and reviewed for accuracy and quality.
