Can Superhuman CEO Shishir Mehrotra Survive A Grammarly Misstep?

Shishir Mehrotra’s push to turn Grammarly, now parented as Superhuman, into an AI powerhouse has brought a major backlash. In less than a year as CEO, he has rebranded the company, led one acquisition pushed an aggressive pivot to AI agents. But one of these tools, the AI ​​“Expert Review” feature that was introduced last summer, has changed from a show to a liability. Expert Reviews provided users with writing suggestions in the style of well-known authors and journalists, presenting feedback “from” figures who had never agreed to be involved. The tool, since disabled, has become a cautionary example of companies rushing into AI without fully assessing the reputational, legal and ethical risks.

Launched in August, Expert Review promises complementary feedback from marquee names such as author Stephen King and astrologer Neil deGrasse Tyson. The catch is that no “experts” were included who approved the project, which generated advice using AI models trained for their work and simulations.

The writers quickly realized and backed off. “No one asked me for permission to use my name in this way, let alone compensate me for any expert review work my AI character was apparently doing on my behalf,” wrote reporter Casey Newton. In some cases, this feature asked people who would not agree. Vanessa Heggie, an associate professor at the University of Birmingham, called the appearance of historian David Abulafia, who died in January, “obscene.”

Earlier this month, the company was hit with a class-action lawsuit alleging that it was using the names of writers and journalists for marketing purposes without permission, seeking more than five million dollars in damages. “We have reviewed the case, and we believe the legal claims are unfounded and we will vigorously defend ourselves,” Mehrotro said in a statement.

On March 11, the same day the lawsuit was filed, Mehrotra posted a public apology on LinkedIn and announced that Professional Review would be temporarily suspended. “We’re hearing feedback and realizing we’ve fallen short on this,” he wrote, describing the tool as part of Superhuman’s effort to bring AI directly to users. “I want to apologize and acknowledge that we will rethink our approach going forward.”

This controversy came almost a year for Mehrotra. He became CEO after Superhuman acquired Coda, the manufacturing startup he founded and led, at the end of 2024. Prior to that, he held senior roles at YouTube, GoogleTV and Microsoft. Ever since he took over, he has made it clear that his desire is to grow the company beyond its roots, such as language testing.

That strategy came to light last October, when he announced that Grammarly’s parent company would be renamed Superhuman, while the writing tool would retain the Grammarly name. The redesign was intended to target a broader push into workplace productivity and email products as competition for AI-enabled writing tools heats up.

Mehrotra supported the idea with a quick release of the release. Expert Review has come as part of a slew of AI agents that promise to predict essay grades, quote relevant, simulate student reactions and check for plagiarism. It’s unclear whether this ambitious pivot will pay off for Grammarly, which started 17 years ago as a grammar and spelling assistant and ended up being valued at $13 billion by 2021.

Responding to the backlash, Mehrotra suggested that the feature will eventually return in a different form. He said “there’s a better way to bring experts to our platform” and that Superhuman is working on a new version of Expert Reviews designed to “provide more benefits to both users and experts.” Whether those experts will agree to work with the company after this episode is still an open question.