Grammarly launches Expert Review: AI advises in the style of King and Tyson — what this means for Ukrainian communications
Grammarly has introduced Expert Review — a tool that suggests edits in the voices of well-known authors. We examine how this could strengthen the international communications of Ukrainian journalists, state institutions and volunteers — and what risks should be considered.
By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik
March 6, 2026 · 2 min read
Brief: what happened
Grammarly announced a new feature, Expert Review, which analyzes text and offers editorial recommendations by imitating approaches of well-known specialists — from Stephen King to Neil deGrasse Tyson, William Zinsser, and Carl Sagan. The tool scans the document, determines the topic and tone, then shows “cards” with examples and edit options — the author decides which changes to accept.
How it works
The feature is activated in the docs workspace: after entering at least 150 words the system selects relevant “experts” and shows rewrite examples in the right-hand panel. The user can click a name to view the full set of edits, or choose the Show example option for an expanded sample. Full access to Expert Review is available on the Pro, Plus, and Superhuman Go plans; on corporate plans (Enterprise, Business, Education) administrators can control team access. In 2025 Grammarly changed its name to Superhuman and integrated several products under the new brand.
"Expert Review analyzes the context and suggests edits — the final decision is always up to the author."
— Grammarly, press service
Why this matters now
Demand is rising for fast, persuasive texts for international audiences: diplomacy, fundraising, and communicating the truth about the war require not only facts but skillful presentation. The AI editor simplifies preparing materials in English and helps save editors' time — an important advantage for Ukrainian journalists, government communications, and volunteer initiatives working for foreign audiences.
Benefits and risks
Benefits: faster improvements in readability, tone unification for international channels, stylistic and structural suggestions. Risks: excessive stylization, loss of the author's unique voice, potential questions about sources of style and copyright, and the need for fact-checking — AI does not replace verification of facts.
Practical advice for Ukrainian teams
Combine Expert Review with internal editorial standards: use the tool to polish tone, but retain control over facts and key messages. Train teams to distinguish stylistic suggestions from changes that could distort meaning. On corporate plans, configure access so that sensitive materials undergo internal moderation only.
Conclusion
Expert Review is another step in the development of editorial AI: a tool with the potential to amplify Ukrainian messages abroad, but its value will depend on human oversight. Whether Ukrainian communications teams can use this technology to serve truth and effectiveness is a question for them.
