Grammarly turned me into an AI editor against my will and I hate it by Casey Newton

On one hand, it’s fine to suggest that writers incorporate more sensory details and scene-setting into their storytelling. On the other hand, though, why bother to launder such anodyne advice through the stolen persona of a writer like John Carreyrou?

The answer, of course, is that Carreyrou is a master craftsman whose authority as a writer speaks for itself. Grammarly, on the other hand, is a soulless machine-learning operation that is struggling to stay ahead of the further advances in AI that will make it irrelevant. Lots of people would love to write like Carreyrou; no one is striving to write like Grammarly.

Grammarly has since "disabled" the "feature."

This new debacle in the AI writing space reminds me of the superb video essay You are a better writer than AI. (Yes, you.).

I've never liked Grammarly. It never made sense to me when spellcheck and the like are so well integrated into operating systems. I recall one publication I wrote for requiring it be installed. The software was clunky, ugly, and invasive. I'm fairly sure I uninstalled it without telling them. This "expert" recommendation looks clunky, ugly, and invasive. I do find it hilarious that Grammarly would deploy recommendations from some of AI's biggest critics.

I would be more annoyed at Grammarly’s appropriation of my likeness, and the likeness of so many of my friends and other writers that I admire, if it weren’t for the sheer desperation evidenced by the move. A standalone writing assistant made for a fine business in 2009, when Grammarly launched; in 2026, it’s a commodity feature. Anyone with access to Claude, ChatGPT or Gemini can already get editing that makes Grammarly's core product look like a relic.