Pangram has hired an 'attack critic' to publicly shame individuals on social media who are suspected of being AI users, according to a report by The Decoder dated 3 September 2026.
According to the source description, Pangram assesses whether AI was used in creating a text only with some reliability. However, the public shaming campaign presents a high score as evidence that a person did not think or work on the material themselves.
The source specifically notes that a high score can apply to text created after hours of original research just as easily as to text prepared in ten seconds via a prompt. The available evidence base is limited to The Decoder's synopsis and does not include independent confirmation.
editorial commentary
Why it matters
A likely consequence is an intensification of debates over whether Pangram scores can be used as a basis for public accusations. The next observable signal will be Pangram's response: whether the company explains the method's limitations and the rules for applying results. Significant uncertainty remains, as only The Decoder's synopsis is available without primary materials or independent confirmation.