61–70 of 405 posts
> if they've seen your content 1,000x vs a couple of long reads. [..] From there, you can capture their email to touch them on another channel (inbox), push them to your YouTube / Twitter / community, etc. The endless game of catching people's attention. Focus on actual value creation? Nah, let's just mind-hack everyone into buying the product. It works, it's obviously a game worth billions, but I find it deeply depr…
I've spent most of my adult life using using linkedin for business development and job search. What people don't realize, it's the worlds most accurate business database. Highly effective for networking, where you can see peoples interests and interaction and match up with like minded peers and contemporaries.
I agree that the user generated content is indeed mediocre.
When it comes to posting content, I subscribe to Cal Newport's theory, if you produce something that is valuable and rare, people will find you. People spending their time posting large amounts of content are not creating anything valuable or rare.
This reads like it was written by a developer 'who doesn't get marketing'. > Nothing you post there is going to change your career. I can attribute millions of dollars in revenue to LinkedIn, as can a lot of my 'LinkedIn friends' > Doing work that matters might. This is a pre-requisite for winning on LinkedIn. The kind of content that performs best are strong opinions informed by actual expertise. > Go for depth over…
> The kind of content that performs best are strong opinions informed by actual expertise. …and here's what it taught me about B2B sales.
This reads like it was written by a developer 'who doesn't get marketing'. > Nothing you post there is going to change your career. I can attribute millions of dollars in revenue to LinkedIn, as can a lot of my 'LinkedIn friends' > Doing work that matters might. This is a pre-requisite for winning on LinkedIn. The kind of content that performs best are strong opinions informed by actual expertise. > Go for depth over…
> if they've seen your content 1,000x vs a couple of long reads. [..] From there, you can capture their email to touch them on another channel (inbox), push them to your YouTube / Twitter / community, etc. Such zero value activities are a plague on the economy and the whole world. Obviously the equivalents in the e.g financial sector have more impact than some node.js developer going off on linkedin about the MANGO s…
This reads like it was written by a developer 'who doesn't get marketing'. > Nothing you post there is going to change your career. I can attribute millions of dollars in revenue to LinkedIn, as can a lot of my 'LinkedIn friends' > Doing work that matters might. This is a pre-requisite for winning on LinkedIn. The kind of content that performs best are strong opinions informed by actual expertise. > Go for depth over…
LinkedIn is basically a marketplace for boomers. Facebook but for jobs pretty much. Im sorry to hear u think this highly of it, as its just a gathering of pretentious people.
Question is: What can you do? We can't stop this trend. People are looking for "reach". And you can achieve that using differet approaches. What we experience at LinkedIn is the simplest approach: Spam the system with your AI generated "nonsense" posts, add a selfie and people will follow. It's not even bad content, it's positive content, emotional content, touching content. But first it's way easier to create than writing long technical articles or analysis. And seconds it's easiere to consume - people want short messages.
And it's not only LinkedIN, it's everywhere. Medium, Facebook, you name it.
Sad for everyone trying to communicatae more than just "calendar mottos". But true.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
LinkedIn is basically a marketplace for boomers. Facebook but for jobs pretty much. Im sorry to hear u think this highly of it, as its just a gathering of pretentious people.
where are the non-boomers looking for jobs these days?
Personally, I think that using any service that claim to deliver, for which in the real world I just can't find much supporting evidence and otherwise mostly claims from (direct or indirect) stakeholders (incl. users themselves), feels rather dumb. LinkedIn, and the ecosystem developed around it, has every incentive to be dishonest. In such cases, the burden of evidence that proves otherwise needs to be high. I've not seen that bar ever reached for LinkedIn; not even remotely. At least not where I live.
If my perspective leads to people claiming I'm "denying reality" (heard that a few times), it only suggests me how (practically or emotionally) invested some people apparently must be. To me it still looks and feels mostly like a huge fraud-machine. Nothing particularly new specific to LinkedIn though. Before LinkedIn, I've seen how recruitment and hiring agencies wiggled their way into the employment market, where I grew up in. It did not see it do any good. I'd say it shared plenty of characteristics with cancer.
It may take considerable effort, but I'd recommend doing your own due diligence and find potential employers yourself, to then approach them directly. Still works quite well, even today and without needing questionable middlemen/services.
Just my two cents; mileage may vary.
It took me approximately 5 minutes to install uBlock Origin and create a filter that removes the feed. No more toxic mediocrity to see because there are no posts to see. It makes Linkedin a lot more bearable for me.
LinkedIn isn’t a professional network, it’s a slave auction with a newsfeed. Workers line up to show their teeth - “failure is just learning in disguise”, “kindness is leadership”, all that drivel - while hoping to be picked by a master who won’t beat them too hard. The algorithm is the overseer. It doesn’t want insight, it wants compliance: claps, congratulations, and endless oatmeal platitudes that prove you’ll pla…