Why LinkedIn Rewards Mediocrity

LinkedIn's engagement-driven algorithm systematically elevates shallow, meaningless content over substantive professional discourse, according to a new analysis that highlights how major platforms prioritize user retention metrics over content quality. Entrepreneur and product executive Elliot Smith describes encountering a "seemingly endless stream of posts that are over fluffed, over produced and ultimately say nothing" that he categorizes as "toxic mediocrity."

Smith argues the platform's reward system creates a destructive cycle where "comments, likes and other engagement" signal user activity to LinkedIn's algorithm, which then promotes similar vapid content. "LinkedIn wants you on LinkedIn," Smith writes, noting the Microsoft-owned platform correlates engagement with ad clicks and premium conversions. Smith recommends professionals focus on substantive work rather than platform gaming, arguing "nothing you post there is going to change your career."

A Microsoft product

[test321]

"over fluffed, over produced and ultimately say nothing" ... "the Microsoft-owned platform"

Just like messages in every normal Microsoft product, then. "Teams is preparing the page for you" ... "It's almost ready!" ...

Nothing to do with Microsoft

[Mr. Dollar Ton]

I don't need an account there, but I've seen a little of it. It is a bazaar, where the relevant "content" are the acquaintances you've made at work, kinda like your namecard holder of 40 years ago, but with self-updating namecards.

The spam that is reposted there by the Indian "HR gurus" in the "timeline" is something people aggressively block or ignore.

"Substantive professional discourse" is something that has never happened on Linked in and isn't likely to happen, just like it didn't happen inside your nam

Re:

[flatulus]

Allow me to introduce you to my little friend. He's called "the period". He excels in breaking long run-on text into digestible units known as "sentences."

Re: A Microsoft product

[doobes]

Kudos.

Re:

[Compaq Disk Rereader]

Just like messages in every normal Microsoft product, then. "Teams is preparing the page for you" ... "It's almost ready!" ...

I think they stole the idea from Apple. It was okay and different the first time you turned on your mac and the setup greeted you like a person.
When windows and teams does it I'm just fucking irritated.

Job

[registrations_suck]

I get on linked in when I'm looking for a job.

Other than that? Not so much.

Re:Job

[arglebargle_xiv]

I get on linked in when I'm looking for a job.

Well no wonder you didn't find one there, Job is in the Old Testament. You'll never find a Job by hanging out on LinkedIn.

Re:

[registrations_suck]

I never said I didn't find one there. What are you talking about?

Re:

[bleedingobvious]

Wooooooooosh!

Re:

[Kokuyo]

I have never found anything worth my time on thar site.

Not. A. Single. Thing.

Re:

[registrations_suck]

I have never found anything worth my time on thar site.

Not. A. Single. Thing.

Sounds like the mall.

I would argue

[thegarbz]

The problem is actually the users who are engaged by shallow worthless content. Think doom scrollers on Facebook who could instead be learning something.

Re:

[quintessencesluglord]

Dunno.

While that certainly is a market, I'd like to think much of the doomscrolling is actually looking for signs of life amidst the crud.

Bland engagement can be had anywhere, and short of reinforcing uniformity of opinions, why bother?

But the most puerile takes are often the most popular, so maybe it is parroting just to gain attention?

Re:

[Austerity Empowers]

You can't blame society, people are people. Ragebait, trolling and "that guy who is so wrong on the internet that I can't not flame him" have been around forever. The issue is that engagement is easily measured, but engagement does not equate to quality. If we had a way of assessing quality that was reliable, we could probably have social media websites that aren't trash.

Re:

[Tony Isaac]

This makes sense. There is only a certain segment of LinkedIn users who scroll through this stuff.

I do use LinkedIn, I keep my profile updated, I've gotten three jobs through the site. But the posts and articles, I never bother with, and I've turned off all notifications not related to actual job searches. I suspect there is a significant number of people like me, who use it for job networking, and find the random posts by acquaintances to be mostly overrated or crass self-promotion.

Finally ditched LinkedIn

[dskoll]

I nuked my LinkedIn account a couple of weeks ago. The slop on that site is unbelievable. And being retired, I no longer need to care about recruiters or job ads, so meh...

Though... being retired, I did skewer the slop-producers on that site without worrying about watching my tone or language. That was kind of fun, but in the end, it's empty-calorie fun.

Because most people are mediocre

[khchung]

and they don't want to be told they are mediocre.

Hence if you want to engage most people, you push mediocre content to them to make them feel comfortable, so all social platforms need to reward mediocrity.

If you want to confirm this, just try to point out other people's mistakes in Facebook. See if you get a thank you or if you get flamed for it.

Alogrithm doesn't matter: banality comes from fear

[erice]

LinkedIn posters almost entirely fit into two categories:

1. They represent companies so they are fearful of posting anything that would upset their employer.
2. They are job seekers or potential job seekers who don't to risk upsetting their current or potential employer

Given those constraints, one can't say much that is interesting. And, there is still a feeling that one must be seen so write rubbish they think is inoffensive enough to not them in the trouble. Glassdoor keeps posters anonymous. As a result, even though it is still a job board, the posts and comments are a lot more provocative and interesting.

Re:

[serviscope_minor]

You missed the self-styled "thought leader" consultant bloivators.

Thoughtless Thought Leaders

[Luthair]

The irony of LinkedIn is there are a lot of people posting wanting to be seen as thought leaders but the posts are largely vapid.

Re:

[Compaq Disk Rereader]

Dude if you have something to say. say it. Don't try to dress it up with chatgpt. If you sound dumb without it perhaps you're not the guy for advertising your worldviews.

Re:

[flatulus]

I'm not so sure it's ChatGPT. I think ChatGPT is much more competent at punctuation than this "author".

And I keep expecting "Workers of the world unite" in his postings.

Re:

[Compaq Disk Rereader]

No, it's clearly someone's experiment using LLMs to generate political spam.
It's dawned on me that getting an LLM that makes good points is expensive and might be dangerous to your cause.
But filling the internet with bickering moron-bots on simpler models... well that'd be pretty useful for making people hate their neighbors.

I have a feeling I might remember making this particular post well into the future. Looking back at 2025 as one of the last years I had discussion on the public internet. Joining so m

Just social media

[sourcerror]

"endless stream of posts that are over fluffed, over produced and ultimately say nothing" -- that's just social media in general. Why turn a job board into social media?

Re:

[ShanghaiBill]

Why turn a job board into social media?

Because running a social media site is more profitable.

The only value LinkedOut has

[bleedingobvious]

is as a fantastic source of targets ripe for hacking.

Re:

[Koen Lefever]

is as a fantastic source of targets ripe for hacking.

Indeed: they leaked a lot of personal information, including 164 million e-mail addresses and passwords, in 2012.

LinkedIn waited four years before they warned the people affected. (Source [haveibeenpwned.com])

Huh?

[Vranitzky]

Are there actually people who look at LinkedIn posts? On the extremely rare occasions when I go on LinkedIn, like when I'm looking for a job (you never know, mostly to know which companies are recuiting), I see that there are people posting idiotic crap. I always thought the slop was basically ignored by everyone? I guess there's one born every day and with the rise of AI (=Artificial Idiocy) it'll be worse and worse.

It can change your career

[tatroc]

I have a former co worker who posted a lot of un substantive stuff, he said it helps him find new jobs quickly.

Of course it does

[DrXym]

LinkedIn has pivoted to its feed as a source of revenue and by default the feed is dross.

Want a coating that repels rain from your windscreen that some huckster in India is selling? No? Tough you're going to see it anyway. Want to see a machine that only exists in CG that can walk and pick up garbage? No? Lol well it's there. Want to see how spiritual guidance can affect your work life harmony? No? Well some bitch is going to tell you anyway. 1 in every 5 posts will be something like this no matter how ma

Yep, got the same impression

[gweihir]

I was asked by one of my employers to post something there from time to time. After looking, it became clear to me that I would struggle to get down to that level.

Hardly surprising

[RUs1729]

LinkedIn was a piece of shit already before MS took it over. That's why it fits so well in MS, who have merely fine-tuned LinkedIn's enshittification ongoing process.

No, shit. Microsoft want Linkedin to become facebo

[TrentTheThief]

That's why you're seeing all those tall advertising bullshit posts.

Linkedin is a shitshow.