By Breaking Editor 
Grammarly is under scrutiny following revelations that its newly launched “expert review” feature utilizes the names and identities of real individuals purportedly without their consent. Academics and professionals, including those identified as AI experts, have expressed indignation over their unauthorized representation as contributors to the writing-enhancement tool.
Users on social media platforms, including @abtran.bsky.social and @andybrockman.bsky.social, reported that Grammarly appears to be using their identities to sell services, with suggestions of a potential class action lawsuit gaining traction. Many users, including some self-identified experts, have found their names attached to AI-generated critiques and suggestions, prompting concerns about ethical practices in the company’s approach to artificial intelligence.
Prominent voices in the tech community have criticized Grammarly for not providing explicit opt-in mechanisms for individuals whose identities are misappropriated. @caseynewton.bsky.social highlighted Grammarly’s recent communication allowing experts to opt-out of such usage, albeit without compensation. The company maintains it will continue to employ these identities unless the respective individuals explicitly refuse.
The backlash has been fueled further by concerns that Grammarly’s algorithms create suggestions utilizing the façades of prominent figures, including those who are deceased. This introduction has raised ethical questions about the implications of AI on creativity and the boundaries of respect for individuals’ legacies.
In reaction to this growing controversy, Grammarly’s “expert reviews” have been dubbed an advancement that may blur the line between human authenticity and machine-generated content. Experts and users alike are calling for stricter regulations and clearer disclosures regarding AI applications in consumer products.
As the discussion around AI technologies and ethical usage reaches a fever pitch, Grammarly’s handling of this situation may set a precedent for how identity and consent are treated across the industry.