The New “Expert Review” Feature
Grammarly’s latest update introduces a function that promises AI‑generated feedback “inspired by” subject‑matter experts. Users can select a field—history, science, literature—and receive tailored suggestions purportedly mirroring the voice of top scholars.
Who’s Behind the Advice?
While the marketing copy lists respected names, the actual content is produced by an algorithm. In a recent test, the system even cited a former university professor who passed away years ago, and—surprise—my own boss. This raises a big question: are these real individuals giving permission, or are we being fed a curated, fabricated persona?
Ethics in AI‑Generated Attribution
The Verge and Wired both flagged that Grammarly’s approach skirts the line between homage and misappropriation. When a deceased academic’s name is used without a clear disclaimer, it feels more like exploitation than tribute. Even living experts—like a manager who never signed off—can be ghost‑written, turning a tool into a potential breach of personal brand.
Impact on Users
For writers, the promise of “expert” feedback is enticing, but the lack of transparency undermines trust. If your boss’s voice is embedded in a critique, what does that say about data ownership? And if a deceased professor’s work is repurposed, it could be a legal gray area.
What Should You Do?
- Read the Terms – Check whether Grammarly discloses the source of each “expert.”
- Opt‑Out – Disable the feature if you’re uncomfortable.
- Report Misuse – Send feedback to Grammarly’s support and the platform’s privacy team.
- Stay Informed – Follow updates on AI attribution policies.
Bottom Line
Grammarly’s ambitious feature underscores a larger industry dilemma: how to credit knowledge while respecting identity. Transparency and consent are not just buzzwords; they’re essentials for trustworthy AI.
Ready to Voice Your Thoughts?
Help shape the conversation about AI, identity, and user rights. Take our quick survey now!
