Grammarly to Continue Using Author Identities by Default Unless Users Opt Out
Last week, my colleagues uncovered that Superhuman’s Grammarly had turned me into an AI editor, using my real name without my consent. The same happened to my boss, Nilay Patel, and colleagues David Pierce and Tom Warren, along with many more notable authors, as initially reported. Grammarly’s new “Expert Review” feature leverages our names to lend credibility to its AI suggestions, which frankly don’t deserve it.
In response to the backlash, Grammarly has finally spoken up — but instead of issuing an apology or retracting the feature, they’ve decided to allow us to opt out of something we were unaware was happening in the first place.
“Grammarly declined my request to interview CEO Shishir Mehrotra today,” noted my former colleague Casey Newton in the latest issue of Platformer. “However, they mentioned that in light of the criticism, experts can opt out by emailing expertoptout@superhuman.com.”
The company also shared a statement from Alex Gay, vice president of product and corporate marketing at Superhuman:
> We’ve heard the feedback about this tool and appreciate the engagement from those who have taken the time to raise thoughtful questions about the functionality and the experts surfaced. We agree that the product experience can be improved for both users and experts. The agent was designed to help users discover influential perspectives and scholarship that add value to their work. We want the people behind those perspectives to have greater control over whether their name is used, while providing new ways for influential voices to reach new audiences. Our goal is to improve Expert Review to deliver this outcome.
Notably absent from that statement is any mention of “permission,” and there’s no indication that Grammarly plans to reconsider the concept. It seems the company intends to continue presenting real individuals as the source of its edits, albeit with “greater control.”
We inquired whether Superhuman would offer any protection for our names beyond the opt-out email, and spokesperson Jen Dakin replied, “We are working on further refining the feature in addition to the opt-out option.”
Superhuman better provide authors with more substantial control over their names than just an email address, as relying on email is an inadequate solution.
How were we supposed to know our names were being used without trying the product ourselves? Shouldn’t individuals have their names safeguarded even if they’re unaware of Grammarly’s existence? Why should we have to take the initiative to protect our own identities?
I don’t use Grammarly, and I only discovered my name was being used because two journalists at The Verge decided to investigate. We can’t conduct such tests for everyone.
