Back to News
technology

Grammarly’s ‘expert review’ is just missing the actual experts

Anthony Ha
Loading...
4 min read
0 likes
⚡ Quantum Brief
Grammarly’s AI-powered "Expert Review" feature, launched in August 2025, claims to offer writing advice from famous authors and journalists—including living figures—without their consent or involvement. The tool generates suggestions framed as direct input from experts like Casey Newton and Timnit Gebru, despite no affiliation or endorsement, raising ethical concerns about misrepresentation and intellectual property. Grammarly defends the feature by citing publicly available works as the basis for AI-generated advice, but critics argue it misleads users by implying direct expert involvement. TechCrunch tested the tool and found it suggested edits attributed to journalists from competing outlets, excluding its own staff, highlighting inconsistencies in the feature’s implementation. Legal and ethical questions persist as the company’s disclaimer states references are “for informational purposes only,” yet the tool’s design blurs the line between AI synthesis and genuine expert review.
AI Audio Summary
0:00 / 0:00
Click to play
gabriel-vasiliu-mdzxj9Ea7JM-unsplash.jpg
Quantum News · Media Library

A recently-added feature in Grammarly purports to improve users’ writing with help from the world’s great writers and thinkers — and some tech journalists, too. Launched in August 2025 as part of a broader set of AI-powered features, Expert Review appears in the sidebar of Grammarly’s main writing assistant, allowing users to bring up revision suggestions “from the perspective” of subject matter experts. Wired noted that this Grammarly frames this feedback as if it was coming from well-known authors, whether they’re living or dead. In some cases, according to The Verge, it can even appear to come from tech journalists at The Verge, Wired, Bloomberg, The New York Times, and other publications. Of course, I couldn’t help but wonder: What about TechCrunch? I copy-pasted an early draft of this post into Grammarly in the hopes that that I might see some tips from my TC colleagues, but I was instead told to add ethical context like Casey Newton, “leverage the anecdote for reader alignment” like Kara Swisher, and “pose the bigger accountability question” like Timnit Gebru. Which was all rather disappointing: Yes, the feature seems ill-conceived, but if all those other pubs are going to get mentioned, then what are we doing wrong? Anyway, to state the obvious, none of these figures appear to be involved in Expert Reviews or to have given Grammarly permission to use their names. Alex Gay, vice president of product and corporate marketing at Grammarly’s parent company Superhuman, told The Verge that these experts are mentioned “because their published works are publicly available and widely cited.” And in its user guide to the feature, Grammarly says, “References to experts in Expert Review are for informational purposes only and do not indicate any affiliation with Grammarly or endorsement by those individuals or entities.” Techcrunch event Disrupt 2026: The tech ecosystem, all in one room Your next round. Your next hire. Your next breakout opportunity. Find it at TechCrunch Disrupt 2026, where 10,000+ founders, investors, and tech leaders gather for three days of 250+ tactical sessions, powerful introductions, and market-defining innovation. Register now to save up to $400. Save up to $300 or 30% to TechCrunch Founder Summit 1,000+ founders and investors come together at TechCrunch Founder Summit 2026 for a full day focused on growth, execution, and real-world scaling. Learn from founders and investors who have shaped the industry. Connect with peers navigating similar growth stages. Walk away with tactics you can apply immediatelyOffer ends March 13. San Francisco, CA | October 13-15, 2026 REGISTER NOW Which is reasonably clear, I guess. But it raises the question: In what sense is Grammarly actually providing an “expert review”? Perhaps none at all, as historian C.E. Aubin told Wired: “These are not expert reviews, because there are no ‘experts’ involved in producing them.” Topics AI, grammarly, Media & Entertainment Anthony Ha Anthony Ha is TechCrunch’s weekend editor. Previously, he worked as a tech reporter at Adweek, a senior editor at VentureBeat, a local government reporter at the Hollister Free Lance, and vice president of content at a VC firm. He lives in New York City. You can contact or verify outreach from Anthony by emailing anthony.ha@techcrunch.com.

View Bio June 9 Boston, MA Actively scaling? Fundraising? Planning your next launch?TechCrunch Founder Summit 2026 delivers tactical playbooks and direct access to 1,000+ founders and investors who are building, backing, and closing.Register by March 13 to save up to $300. REGISTER NOW Most Popular Cluely CEO Roy Lee admits to publicly lying about revenue numbers last year Julie Bort Cursor is rolling out a new kind of agentic coding tool Russell Brandom Jensen Huang says Nvidia is pulling back from OpenAI and Anthropic, but his explanation raises more questions than it answers Connie Loizos Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei calls OpenAI’s messaging around military deal ‘straight up lies,’ report says Amanda Silberling ChatGPT uninstalls surged by 295% after DoD deal Sarah Perez MyFitnessPal has acquired Cal AI, the viral calorie app built by teens Julie Bort Anthropic’s Claude reports widespread outage Ram Iyer

Read Original

Source Information

Source: TechCrunch

Discussion

0 professional contributions

Sign in to join this professional discussion.

Be the first to add a constructive contribution.