Grammarly's "Expert Review" feature, designed to offer users writing advice, purports to be "inspired by" subject matter experts. A recent report by Wired highlighted the disconcerting inclusion of recently-deceased professors within this feature. Further investigation by this publication revealed an equally surprising discovery: several current staff members, including the author's direct supervisor, were also listed.
The AI-generated feedback presented comments ostensibly derived from The Verge's editor-in-chief, Nilay Patel, along with editor-at-large David Pierce and senior editors Sean Hollister and Tom Warren. Crucially, none of these individuals had granted Grammarly permission for their inclusion in these "expert reviews."
Launched in August, the feature aims to help users "sharpen your message through the lens of industry-relevant perspectives." Upon selecting the "expert review" button in the Grammarly sidebar, the tool analyzes writing and generates AI-driven suggestions "inspired by" relevant experts. These "industry-relevant perspectives" span a wide range of fields, notably featuring public figures such as Stephen King, Neil deGrasse Tyson, and Carl Sagan.
Beyond The Verge's own staff, numerous other prominent tech journalists were identified within the feature. This list included former Verge editors Casey Newton and Joanna Stern, former Verge writer Monica Chin, Wired’s Lauren Goode, Bloomberg’s Mark Gurman and Jason Schreier, the New York Times’ Kashmir Hill, The Atlantic’s Kaitlyn Tiffany, PC Gamer’s Wes Fenlon, Gizmodo’s Raymond Wong, Digital Foundry founder Richard Leadbetter, Tom’s Guide editor-in-chief Mark Spoonauer, former Rock Paper Shotgun editor-in-chief Katharine Castle, and former IGN news director Kat Bailey. It was also observed that some expert descriptions contained inaccuracies, such as outdated job titles, which could have been rectified had Superhuman sought permission or verified information directly with these individuals.
In a statement provided to The Verge, Alex Gay, vice president of product and corporate marketing at Grammarly's parent company, Superhuman, clarified: “The Expert Review agent doesn’t claim endorsement or direct participation from those experts; it provides suggestions inspired by works of experts and points users toward influential voices whose scholarship they can then explore more deeply.”
When questioned about whether Superhuman considered notifying or seeking permission from the individuals named in its AI feature, Gay responded, “The experts in Expert Review appear because their published works are publicly available and widely cited.”
However, efforts to "explore more deeply" into the experts’ work proved challenging. The feature frequently crashed, and its purported "sources" often linked to spammy replicas of legitimate websites or archived copies that were not the original source pages.
“The experts in Expert Review appear because their published works are publicly available and widely cited.”
Furthermore, some linked sources directed users to completely unrelated content not authored by the individual whose work was supposedly being exemplified. This raises the possibility that suggestions attributed to one expert might, in fact, be based on another's work. This discrepancy is only discoverable if users expand suggestions by clicking "see more" and then selecting the "source" button.
The presentation of these suggestions also raised concerns about potential misleading interpretations. Within platforms like Google Docs, the AI-generated feedback closely resembled comments from real users, thereby simulating the experience of receiving direct edits from the expert the AI was imitating. For instance, one suggestion "inspired by" Verge senior editor Sean Hollister proposed adding a parenthetical for context that was already present elsewhere. This directly contradicted the actual editing style of the real Sean Hollister, who prioritizes clear, straightforward language and avoids redundant explanations.
Had this advice been followed and presented to the genuine Sean Hollister, it is highly probable he would have removed the very parenthetical Grammarly's AI suggested. While an AI can undoubtedly ingest and mimic vast quantities of someone's published writing, this strategy alone cannot imbue it with the nuanced editorial judgment or distinct style of a human expert, regardless of official branding or an "expert" label.
The Editorial Staff at AIChief is a team of professional content writers with extensive experience in AI and marketing. Founded in 2025, AIChief has quickly grown into the largest free AI resource hub in the industry.