Write Like Kara Swisher?
I recently came across this article:
It discusses the legal battle over a Grammarly feature that provides feedback in the style of famous writers, including Kara Swisher, a celebrated journalist. The idea is that Grammarly users can use this tool to make their writing appear as if a famous writer wrote it. Unfortunately, they introduced this feature without her permission—big no-no.
Even though I use Grammarly multiple times a day, I was not aware of this feature until I read the article. Well, what do I think about all this?
People and companies try all kinds of things to get ahead of their competition. This ranges from tiny ethical improvements to unspeakable crimes that make headlines for years. What Grammarly did lies somewhere in the middle.
I think it would be neat to have feedback from my favorite authors. Jack London editing one of my books? What an honor! Except that is not possible, so the closest writers can do is either use an editor who is familiar with London’s work or an AI model trained on his work.
Is using such an AI tool ethical? I am sure that while deceased, Jack London’s celebrated books are still copyrighted. Meaning that some company or person holds the rights, and it is illegal to use these words without permission.
What about a deceased author whose work is not copyrighted, like Charles Dickens or William Shakespeare? I suppose that would be alright by my values.
Well, that is not the real question. How would I feel if Grammarly used my work and name for its “famous author” feedback tool? I would grin from ear to ear as my “advice” “helped” other writers. Yeah, that would be a hoot.
After the glory died away, I would feel left out because that is a paid feature, and I would not be getting a dime. (Side note: Grammarly removed this feature due to the lawsuit.) So, like Kara Swisher, I would be angry.
Of course, no writer would pay to have an AI version of me edit anything. Why? I cannot speak to how professional editors perform their magic, but I can tell you how I self-edit. It takes a year to fix the many flaws in my first draft. During this time, I think about all kinds of possibilities: fix things, break things, add things, and delete like a bandit. It is a slog process that no computer can or should replicate. Yet, I do get results. (Yeah, yeah, I know. Not always the best outcome.)
Another way of saying it is that I slowly smash my first draft into something I feel comfortable enough to ask a professional editor to fix. The problem is that computer tools like Grammarly do not work that way. They are mindless programs that spit out automatic suggestions.
I imagine that a professional editor comes as close to what Grammarly does. They make one pass addressing multiple issues. What is Grammarly’s style? The word “flat” is a good description.
This Grammarly feature attempts to correct this flatness by mimicking the style of famous authors. Hemingway, for example, has a forward style with elegant descriptions, while William Shakespeare writes in prose.
The idea is that a nobody author like me can create a novel as good as Jack London’s. And seeing how AI is progressing, it is likely that this technology will become good enough to achieve this. I would argue that this is a bad path to travel.
Take my first book as an example. It is about a less-than-perfect author who is captured, forced to undergo a bizarre medical procedure that extends his life at the cost of taking other people’s lives, and interviews his 500-year-old female captor. Can you imagine Jack London ever writing such a plot? Not in a million years. So, why write my book in his style?
When I began, I cobbled together a style that fit my particular plot. Shoehorning Jack London’s style would cause an awful read. Still, Jack London is a fantastic author, and drawing on his work will always be helpful.
So… let’s pretend I used a Jack London style tool for my first book. The results would likely be a more flowing story with a minimized impact. Essentially, a watered-down story that was easier to read.
Readers would be confused by the contrast between the easy-going writing style and the strong content. Meaning, even if Jack London were alive, and he edited my book to follow his style, I do not think that would have made my work more appealing to readers. And the same could be said for, say, a romance, mystery, or thriller written in a Jack London style.
I think this is the disconnect between this feature and what writers need. Jack London would never say, “You need to write your book in my style.” And I should be intelligent enough to reply, “Yeah, I see what you are saying.” But this is what the Grammarly feature was attempting to do.
So… let’s pretend that was what I was going for. My next book will be in the exact style of the celebrated Jack London novel, White Fang.
While I would never mooch off Jack London’s cherished creations, I do not think I am capable of achieving that level of story or writing ability. But that is where the Grammarly feature could be useful. Right?
I have to be honest and say that this might be true—White Fang: The Next Generation. Ewww, typing that hurt. Still, I can see how an AI tool could help me create a facsimile.
What would the public think? “Hey readers, I wrote a great book in the style of Jack London and used the Grammarly tool to make it perfect!” Yeah, people are already fed up with all the AI slop. “When I want to read a Jack London book, I will. Not one that you created using AI garbage.”
What if I did not tell my readers what I was doing? “Dogs of the North” could be my title. Ewww, typing that hurt again. Critics would see right through such an obvious ruse and leave a pile of nasty reviews.
What if I were writing a book and needed a tiny scene that was written in Jack London’s style? “In alternate universe number twelve, Jim Manchester wrote the excellent novel Black Tooth. The following is a quote…”
I concede this would be a good use of such an AI tool, and I think readers would agree. The problem is that this application has a very narrow window of acceptance among readers. So narrow, in fact, that I do not think it is worth a big company like Grammarly’s time to perfect.
In conclusion, some AI company will inevitably perfect this feature, resulting in generated text that reads like a famous author. I cannot stop that, but I can choose never to let such a tool touch my words. Still, it might be fun to play with for an hour.
You’re the best -Bill
May 13, 2026
Even though I use Grammarly multiple times a day, I was not aware of this feature until I read the article. Well, what do I think about all this?
People and companies try all kinds of things to get ahead of their competition. This ranges from tiny ethical improvements to unspeakable crimes that make headlines for years. What Grammarly did lies somewhere in the middle.
I think it would be neat to have feedback from my favorite authors. Jack London editing one of my books? What an honor! Except that is not possible, so the closest writers can do is either use an editor who is familiar with London’s work or an AI model trained on his work.
Is using such an AI tool ethical? I am sure that while deceased, Jack London’s celebrated books are still copyrighted. Meaning that some company or person holds the rights, and it is illegal to use these words without permission.
What about a deceased author whose work is not copyrighted, like Charles Dickens or William Shakespeare? I suppose that would be alright by my values.
Well, that is not the real question. How would I feel if Grammarly used my work and name for its “famous author” feedback tool? I would grin from ear to ear as my “advice” “helped” other writers. Yeah, that would be a hoot.
After the glory died away, I would feel left out because that is a paid feature, and I would not be getting a dime. (Side note: Grammarly removed this feature due to the lawsuit.) So, like Kara Swisher, I would be angry.
Of course, no writer would pay to have an AI version of me edit anything. Why? I cannot speak to how professional editors perform their magic, but I can tell you how I self-edit. It takes a year to fix the many flaws in my first draft. During this time, I think about all kinds of possibilities: fix things, break things, add things, and delete like a bandit. It is a slog process that no computer can or should replicate. Yet, I do get results. (Yeah, yeah, I know. Not always the best outcome.)
Another way of saying it is that I slowly smash my first draft into something I feel comfortable enough to ask a professional editor to fix. The problem is that computer tools like Grammarly do not work that way. They are mindless programs that spit out automatic suggestions.
I imagine that a professional editor comes as close to what Grammarly does. They make one pass addressing multiple issues. What is Grammarly’s style? The word “flat” is a good description.
This Grammarly feature attempts to correct this flatness by mimicking the style of famous authors. Hemingway, for example, has a forward style with elegant descriptions, while William Shakespeare writes in prose.
The idea is that a nobody author like me can create a novel as good as Jack London’s. And seeing how AI is progressing, it is likely that this technology will become good enough to achieve this. I would argue that this is a bad path to travel.
Take my first book as an example. It is about a less-than-perfect author who is captured, forced to undergo a bizarre medical procedure that extends his life at the cost of taking other people’s lives, and interviews his 500-year-old female captor. Can you imagine Jack London ever writing such a plot? Not in a million years. So, why write my book in his style?
When I began, I cobbled together a style that fit my particular plot. Shoehorning Jack London’s style would cause an awful read. Still, Jack London is a fantastic author, and drawing on his work will always be helpful.
So… let’s pretend I used a Jack London style tool for my first book. The results would likely be a more flowing story with a minimized impact. Essentially, a watered-down story that was easier to read.
Readers would be confused by the contrast between the easy-going writing style and the strong content. Meaning, even if Jack London were alive, and he edited my book to follow his style, I do not think that would have made my work more appealing to readers. And the same could be said for, say, a romance, mystery, or thriller written in a Jack London style.
I think this is the disconnect between this feature and what writers need. Jack London would never say, “You need to write your book in my style.” And I should be intelligent enough to reply, “Yeah, I see what you are saying.” But this is what the Grammarly feature was attempting to do.
So… let’s pretend that was what I was going for. My next book will be in the exact style of the celebrated Jack London novel, White Fang.
While I would never mooch off Jack London’s cherished creations, I do not think I am capable of achieving that level of story or writing ability. But that is where the Grammarly feature could be useful. Right?
I have to be honest and say that this might be true—White Fang: The Next Generation. Ewww, typing that hurt. Still, I can see how an AI tool could help me create a facsimile.
What would the public think? “Hey readers, I wrote a great book in the style of Jack London and used the Grammarly tool to make it perfect!” Yeah, people are already fed up with all the AI slop. “When I want to read a Jack London book, I will. Not one that you created using AI garbage.”
What if I did not tell my readers what I was doing? “Dogs of the North” could be my title. Ewww, typing that hurt again. Critics would see right through such an obvious ruse and leave a pile of nasty reviews.
What if I were writing a book and needed a tiny scene that was written in Jack London’s style? “In alternate universe number twelve, Jim Manchester wrote the excellent novel Black Tooth. The following is a quote…”
I concede this would be a good use of such an AI tool, and I think readers would agree. The problem is that this application has a very narrow window of acceptance among readers. So narrow, in fact, that I do not think it is worth a big company like Grammarly’s time to perfect.
In conclusion, some AI company will inevitably perfect this feature, resulting in generated text that reads like a famous author. I cannot stop that, but I can choose never to let such a tool touch my words. Still, it might be fun to play with for an hour.
You’re the best -Bill
May 13, 2026
BUY MY BOOK
Follow me
Follow me
