Grammarly is facing criticism after reports revealed that its AI feature called “Expert Review” may be using the names of real experts and journalists without their permission.
The tool, which is meant to give users writing advice based on well-known voices, has sparked debate about consent and how AI companies use public identities.
According to a report from The Verge, the feature analyzes a user’s writing and generates feedback that appears to come from experts. The suggestions are described as being “inspired by” the perspectives of well-known figures. These include authors, scientists, and technology journalists.
However, some of the people named in the feature say they never agreed to be included. When testing the tool, The Verge found that the AI produced feedback supposedly based on its own editor in chief Nilay Patel, as well as other Verge editors such as David Pierce, Sean Hollister, and Tom Warren. None of them had given Grammarly permission to use their names or identities in this way.
The feature originally launched in August and is designed to help users improve their writing by offering suggestions through different “industry perspectives.” Users can click the Expert Review option in the Grammarly sidebar, and the system generates advice that reflects the style or thinking of certain experts.
Beyond tech journalists, the feature also references famous figures such as Stephen King, Neil deGrasse Tyson, and Carl Sagan. Many other journalists were also found in the list, including Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman and Jason Schreier, Wired’s Lauren Goode, and New York Times reporter Kashmir Hill.
Some of the expert descriptions also contained outdated job titles or incorrect information. Critics say this suggests the people included were never contacted or asked to verify the details.
In response to the criticism, Alex Gay, vice president of product and corporate marketing at Grammarly’s parent company Superhuman, said the feature does not claim endorsement from the experts. Instead, it generates suggestions inspired by their publicly available work.
Gay explained that the experts appear in the system because their published material is widely available and often cited. He also said the feature aims to guide users toward influential voices whose work they can explore further.
Even so, the situation has raised questions about whether AI companies should ask permission before using real people as inspiration for automated advice. For many journalists and experts whose names appeared in the tool, the concern is not just about accuracy but about control over how their identities are used in AI systems.
If this article helped you, please consider supporting our work. Every small contribution keeps Abijita.com independent and running.
