First, thank you for reading and second, thank you for writing this: “I Will Never Call Myself a ‘Content Creator’. I care too much about my writing to call myself anything other than a writer.” I’ve spent a great deal of time on this platform expounding the same logic.

If you read this article carefully, you will note several points. The main being that it appears Ms. Cooper was fired for using this tool instead of doing her human job as an editor. I don’t know if this was the actual case, but that is what we were being told. I know it has been the case in the past with other editors and this is a profound problem when it does occur because even if it gets “so much right” Grammarly still gets too much wrong and should not be totally relied upon in place of knowledgeable human eyes.

The second point is that this is about such tools being used by editors. My point here does not preclude their

use by writers. Indeed, it doesn’t necessarily preclude the use by editors, either; it merely precludes that use as a “crutch.”

Finally, Grammarly is intended to provide examples as suggestions, nothing more, and only people who are good writers to begin with have complete success with it. Otherwise they are bound to see the mistakes it makes as “corrections.” So that, in the end, we are still in need of the knowledgeable human eye.

For most, Grammarly’s best use is as a spellcheck. Even there it is sometimes questionable. But then, aren’t we all?

Again, thank you for reading, Ms. Michaeljohn.

Possessor of Paul Newman eyes. Author of the straightforward & strange. “Women zai shuo ba.” Be useful; share what you can; help others always. Doctor of texts.

Possessor of Paul Newman eyes. Author of the straightforward & strange. “Women zai shuo ba.” Be useful; share what you can; help others always. Doctor of texts.