Major AI Missteps: The Human Isn’t in the Machine
My LinkedIn has been flooded with posts from long-time editors who found themselves listed as experts at Grammarly. This was done without their knowledge or consent.
Grammarly started in 2009 as a tool designed to check and correct grammar, especially in student writing.[1] In a Nov. 9, 2022, post on the history of the company, Co-Founder Max Lytvyn said the company launched to help prevent plagiarism.
“In these early days, we focused primarily on grammatical error correction (GEC) to help students with their writing. We felt that if we could assist with the basic building blocks of the English language—with the mechanics of writing—maybe we could help people have more confidence in their work and not feel the need to lift text from other sources,” the post reads.[1]
If you can’t see the irony here, well, as we say in the South, “Bless your heart.”
Grammarly was founded with the idea of helping people express themselves better so they could avoid plagiarism. And now, they’re facing a class action lawsuit from editors and writers who were listed as “expert reviewers.”
The lawsuit started with Julia Angwin, an award-winning investigative journalist who founded The Markup, a nonprofit news organization that covers the impact of technology on society.
In a post on LinkedIn, Angwin explained the reason for her post, “Grammarly’s A.I. version of me suggested replacing the first sentence of a news article with an anecdotal opening describing a fictional person named Laura. The bot offered an imagined story about Laura and a button allowing the user to paste that fiction straight into the article.
“Replacing a factual sentence with an imagined story about a person who doesn’t exist is not only bad editing. It’s a deception that could end my career as a journalist (or the career of any journalist who took that terrible advice).”[2]
Casey Newton, the founder and editor of Platformer, which discusses the intersection of democracy and technology, also found himself in the listings.
“Indeed, no one asked me for permission to use my name in this way, much less compensate me for whatever expert-reviewing labor my AI clone was apparently now doing on my behalf. (An annual subscription to Grammarly costs $144.)”, he wrote. “I’ve long assumed that before too long, AI might take my job. I just assumed that someone would tell me when it happened.”[3]
Newton learned his name was on the list from The Verge, a tech news website owned by Vox Media. The reporter for The Verge, Stevie Bonified, found not only the outlet’s own Editor-in-Chief Nilay Patel in the list of experts, but also famous authors including Stephen King, Neil deGrasse Tyson, and Carl Sagan.[4]
Readers, Carl Sagan died in 1996. He can’t offer an opinion on your writing without a Ouija board.
Superhuman, Grammarly’s parent company, removed the feature amid backlash from professionals around the world.
Superhuman’s chief executive, Shishir Mehrotra, apologized in a LinkedIn post. “Over the past week, we received valid critical feedback from experts who are concerned that the agent misrepresented their voices,” he wrote. “We hear the feedback and recognize we fell short on this. I want to apologize and acknowledge that we’ll rethink our approach going forward.”
Mehrotra went on to say the tool will be redesigned to be more useful to Grammarly users and giving experts control over how they want to be involved.[5]
I’m skeptical.
As a bit of a disclaimer, I don’t know if I was included in the expert review selections. Most of the editors and writers who turned up have 10 or more years more experience than I do. But, I’ve also stuck to a niche market for most of my career, so it’s possible. With the tool removed, I won’t find out unless I get a letter in the mail asking me to join the suit.
Wordsmith & Co was initially founded with the tag line: Real Voices. Smarter Content. Humanized AI. But as I’ve worked to build this business, I’ve started focusing more on the Real Voices part. Content is so much richer when it comes from a real person.
You can revisit my post on How I Use AI to get an idea of my past AI use. You’ll notice I’m not using it to generate content. And that’s my continued promise. Whether its my voice or your brand’s voice you need capture, any content from Wordsmith & Co. will be from a Real Voice.
AI “expert” review optional.
References
1. Lytvyn, Max. Nov. 9, 2022. A History of Innovation at Grammarly.
2. Angwin, Julia. March 14, 2026. LinkedIn post.
3. Newton, Casey. March 9, 2026. Grammarly turned me into an AI editor against my will and I hate it. Platformer News.
4. Bonifield, Stevie. March 6, 2026. Grammarly is using our identities without permission. The Verge.
5. Mehrotra, Shishir. March 11, 2026. LinkedIn Post.