I assure you that there are plenty of people posing the same click-bait, politically inflammatory comments on LinkedIn that you would expect on Facebook.
>“You talk on LinkedIn the same way you talk in the office,” said Dan Roth, LinkedIn’s editor in chief. “There are certain boundaries around what is acceptable.”
That is pretty much it. As for the rest of the article it just elaborates on that and I'm not sure I understand what the article is asking.
Maybe I missed it in the article but ... why should we be talking about LinkedIn relative to the other platforms? It is just a site with very a specific use case that isn't what the other sites do.
There's also some insinuation that LinkedIn is some super corporate friendly place. Maybe it is but you know what, AS A USER (not a corporation) I also DO NOT WANT LinkedIn to be Facebook. It might seem corporate friendly, but I'm willing to bet most users want things the way they are as far as not being Facebook as well.
Side note: I really hate questions in titles like this. It's like some attention begging non specific "oh woe is me" social media post. Just tell me what exactly the topic is.
There are a few people who are extremely active on LinkedIn, as if it were Facebook.
I get their posts and articles and notes, and am in some bizarre way slightly bothered by it. Why are you cluttering my interface into what should be a well-designed, single-purpose, focused interaction and experience? This is not where I come to read about your breakfast, exercise, or even life philosophy :-/
I also do not want to be "friends with my grandma or neighbour" on LinkedIn...
Yeah there certainly are those outliers who don't quite get it yet.
One I encountered was a recruiter who I actually liked so I went out of my way to message her and say "I'm just not sure everyone seeing that message feels the same way and on LinkedIn that might not be the best thing to post as far as being a recruiter."
She was all "I'm just being patriotic."
We had a pleasant exchange after that and I don't see her post that stuff anymore.
Normally I wouldn't do that but she struck me as young, naive, not a lot of life experience.... but also genuinely interested in what other people think and I thought it was worth a shot. I was fortunate.
Of course you can, as long as your comfortable with those things affecting your ability to find or keep a job. Proving that you were fired because you support political ideal of your choosing and not "poor performance" is going to be very difficult if the person firing you knows what they're doing.
I would strongly suggest you make your own assessment as far as how well that works out as far as people wanting to hear it or not / listening / the results.
You can, but there are consequences for most people.
Next time you see a comment thread on LinkedIn, look who is responding. In my experience it is overwhelmingly founders and not employees. People that work for others have their speech chilled. People that work with others get benefits from having opinions, and do not have the consequence of income disruption and industry blacklisting.
LinkedIn is a site built to help people socially-network in a way that optimizes for career advancement. Assuming market capitalism rather than cronyism, political discourse is anathema to career advancement. So, to the degree you’re using LinkedIn for what it’s for, you shouldn’t be discussing politics there.
Likewise, to the degree that your goal at your workplace is career advancement (and again, assuming meritocratic promotion over cronyism), you shouldn’t be having political discourse there, either.
But do note that “political discourse” has a specific meaning here—something is only political discourse if there are multiple potential positions likely to crop up in any discussion amongst arbitrary people in the room. If everyone in the room agrees on all the issues to the point that they think they’re “obvious”, then no political discourse is happening even if a normally-political issue is being discussed, so there is no risk of career impact. For example, discussing attending pride rallies in the break-room of an SF-based company is entirely safe. Hanging a patriotic slogan on the wall of your cubicle in a government organization is entirely safe. Etc.
This effect never applies if you’re posting your thoughts on the public Internet, though. There’s always someone “in the room” who disagrees, when the room contains 7bn people.
It's not about can or cannot in strict sense of the word. In principle, you can do whatever you want.
But sometimes (often), people do what they want without considering or being aware of social norms or consequences.
If you're aware of social norms and consequences, make whatever decision you want as an informed, consenting adult.
If you're blissfully unaware of social norms and/or consequences, it is tricky (because of its own social norms:P), but people may try to help you be aware of them.
Personally, I would neither want to discuss politics on LinkedIn or care for others to do so. It's not what LinkedIn as a platform is for, as far as I'm concerned. I don't go to my car dealership to get a beer, I don't interrupt the CIO's presentation to discuss the soccer results, and I don't care for politics on LinkedIn - they each have their own domain. But you may do as you choose :).
At work, it's a lot more fluid - in many environments discussing politics at work is "not a good idea" - why start a heated fight with a co-worker on opposite spectrum if you otherwise respect each other and work well? Or unknowingly jeopardize your chances of promotion because your boss vehemently disagrees with your political views? Or, possibly the worst, you yourself subconsciously not promote or develop your team member because you are now biased due to their differing political views? (it's huge hubris to claim "Oh no I wouldn't be impacted like that").
Other places, small startups of like-minded people, it'll naturally be a subject of conversation.
And in between, even at large corporate settings, you may develop friendship with people who are either like-minded, or open to productive interesting discussion.
But overall message is, know your audience, know the social norms, know the consequences. And then do as you please :)
Otherwise, you need to use discretion, especially now that many people are nationally and globally connected. If you're the type who discusses politics loudly in front of the office, you've already reaped the rewards/punishment for doing so, and LinkedIn will magnify both.
Oh, you can - you just had better make sure you have the Right Opinions before you do. If you wonder what the Right Opinions are, browse through LinkedIn and see what's getting "upvoted".
> Normally I wouldn't do that but she struck me as young, naive, not a lot of life experience.... but also genuinely interested in what other people think and I thought it was worth a shot. I was fortunate.
Depending on the industry, her connections, and career goals, that might be a very rational decision. If your professional network or aspirations involve national-security or Federal contracting then posting some patriotic ooh-rah posts is just her virtue signalling her allegiances to those she works with.
The area around me has loads of Federal work, and you see those types of posts all the time from folks in that industry. Similarly, I have contacts in private sector at companies that are really big into social-justice causes. Those folks will post all kinds of work-unrelated content of that variety.
I think these people fall into 1 of 2 groups, which explains the "why":
1. They're trying to be a "thought leader" on a particular topic (to get more/better job offers in the future).
2. To grow awareness of a brand.
In a lot of cases they're probably doing more harm than good, but in some cases it is a cheap and easy way to get a lot of attention (which is also why it bothers us, and that is how they're doing harm).
I use a lot of discretion when I post on LinkedIn, 100% on brand.
But I really do get a lot of support from having an opinion or posting a perspective on a nuanced topic.
It basically took me coming to terms with not expecting to work for anybody anymore. I am not worried about recruiters and hiring managers taking a dim view of opinions.
But other movers and shakers really do listen, its made it easier to get into rooms, get capital, get acquirers, get legal and the attention of people I want and also didn't know I wanted.
It is a positive feedback loop and I know plenty of employees with opinions are not speaking or liking publicly. Its very similar to following sexy instagram accounts but you don't like or comment anything because your significant other and their friends and potential other mates will take a dim view on what you say. An employer/employee relationship is the same way and describes LinkedIn behavior.
I agree, and I follow a few people who do it well and I get value out of following them. But, my comment about the people doing harm to themselves (or their brand) are the people who are bothersome and are posting what amounts to spam. It doesn't sound like you're in that camp.
When people I am connected to post facebook crap, like political posts, I remove them as a connection. I have no desire to facebook my linkedin. Look at the comment section of most of those posts, and people are no better on LinkedIn than they are on facebook, with very inappropriate language and behavior.
I don't understand this, since wasn't the theory that people act so horrible online partially due to anonymity? Yet some of the worst online behavior I see is on Facebook, where not only is the user's real name and picture attached to the post but family members and friends can see it.
Anonymity plays a part even if youre not anonymous on FB. A lot of (most?) people treat their online worlds as different from the "real world" for some reason, and even though they are not anonymous, they believe that what happens online cannot affect their real day to day life.
In addition, besides anonymity, people are far worse online because there is no real person they are interacting with. They are interacting with a caricature of a person they've built up in their heads based on a highly limited set of information.
Finally, you lose all sorts of body language, tone, and other cues, that prevent you from actually interacting with someone, and instead has you interacting with your vision of them, which is highly influenced by your emotional state and preconceived notion of what you think they're saying.
"They are interacting with a caricature of a person they've built up in their heads based on a highly limited set of information."
I don't think it's reasonable to put the blame on the users. Facebook in particular, creates that caricature in order to increase "engagement".
You will not see a representative sample, much less all, of your friends posts if you use it normally. If two people make one in 20 posts that are outraged, anguished, political, Facebook will probably show them only those of each other, which creates a feedback loop.
People talk about possible future "paperclip maximizer" AIs overwhelming society, but Facebook is essentially doing that right now, only it's "engagement" instead of "paperclips".
I don’t think activity is bad on LinkedIn, if it’s relevant. Some of the best articles I’ve read in 2019 haven’t been in places like Medium, Dev.to and all those other “blogs that are mostly just wordy twitter opinion posts” places. It’s been on LinkedIn. I’ve also seen some fairly interesting discussions on things like ageism in the workplace, hiring practices and some such and I’ve seen a lot of people find jobs, make sales or simply share code by reaching out. All that is great in my personal opinion.
If I see you posting one of those “a great leader...” or any meme/Facebook types post, you’re removed as a connection instantly however. Because I really don’t want my LinkedIn feed to turn into Facebook. That’s not activity though, it’s a matter of what content people share, and I value a lot of activity if it’s interesting.
Ageism in the workplace is definitely an appropriate topic on LinkedIn, because LinkedIn is about work. To me, anything that is not work or business related is crossing the line.
I've been quite surprised to see in the comments here how many people apparently look at the feed in LinkedIn at all. I sometimes post articles on the topic I'm researching, or company-related promotion ('hey, we were on TV' or 'we're hiring') but I've always assumed that most of my contacts who are technical avoid entering the LinkedIn ecosystem unless they are specifically job-hunting, and even then, wouldn't look at the feed section, due to the amount of dross from people trying to "boost their brand."
Groups are different- though it boggles my mind that LinkedIn missed the opportunity to beat Slack on creating useful professional communities with such a head start...
I have noticed that LinkedIn added a lot of addiction-forming "hooks" in the last year (maybe a little longer?), similar to other social networks. The most prominent among these that "liking" will repost to your connections' timeline.
I don't have a problem with this necessarily; after you have worked a while and have several hundred connections+ it is a great way to keep up with what people are doing, so long as they are posting something substantial (new job, press release, etc) and not reposts of empty quotes about innovation from Steve Jobs, Richard Branson, Vishnepolsky, etc.
I usually unfollow rather than disconnect. Disconnecting means I don't want to have anything to do with this person professionally, and you never know when a connection to someone might be useful.
There does seem to be large swathes of users who are Doing LinkedIn Wrong. I constantly get invitations there from friends I already have on Facebook and Twitter, as well as IRL friends, college pals, etc. But no hard feelings—I only accept invitations from people who are in my business network or whose work relates to mine in some tangential way.
LinkedIn is supposed to be the social network for business. Despite my disappointment with them on a number of levels and my low level of usage as a result, their proposition as a company isn't hard to grasp and I don't understand why it's so difficult for others to get it.
>“You talk on LinkedIn the same way you talk in the office,” said Dan Roth, LinkedIn’s editor in chief. “There are certain boundaries around what is acceptable.”
On that note, I've heard of creepy people treating LinkedIn like it's a dating site. So it's just like an office in the bad ways too.
How is it bad for people to find dates in the office? Plenty of people meet their significant others at work. It's a bit bizarre to treat courtship as "bad".
I think it was more along the lines of "shotgunning messages to any women in the area who will accept your connection." If you were hitting on all the women in your office I'd expect HR to want a chat.
It's not bad to find dates in the office. It's bad to message people on LinkedIn with the specific intention of meeting with them for non-professional reasons. There are other, non-professional networks for that.
I agree. LinkedIn is actually a good example about how stricter boundaries in one area can lead to a relaxing or loosening boundaries in another.
I've received linkedin connection requests from people I have only met for a couple hours in a meeting. I've sent a few here and there as well. These requests in a business context are standard fare, but friending someone on a social media network (like Facebook) after a brief meeting could be considered odd, and perhaps in some circumstances even inappropriate.
to give a different data point, in brazil the subjects on linkedin posts is pretty much 4/8chan level right wing political extremism. (e.g. justifying the execution of a black councilwoman by neighbors of the current president)
in a way, it's a walled facebook that is already worse than facebook.
A more charitable reading of the title is that it is a straightforward question that the article answers (as opposed to a hand-wringing exhortation as we naturally assume media questions to be)
When you regulate one thing there a natural incentive to want to expand it and apply it to everything that looks similar, even preemptively or when the original motives for the oversight aren’t there.
The fact they mentioned the number of content editors/mods high up in the article rather than some specific privacy issues or bad incidents says everything about the why.
There’s a strong interest in how SV is self regulating speech online.
> Maybe I missed it in the article but ... why should we be talking about LinkedIn relative to the other platforms? It is just a site with very a specific use case that isn't what the other sites do.
LinkedIn is interesting because it has a notion of identity and social norms based on rewards that enforce reasonable behavior. The content does not pose a threat to democracy (for example) and it's actually very helpful for professionals. I depend on it and use it every day. At least some of this is not the use case but the structure of the social interaction and how behavior is tied to real-life consequences.
It's worth looking at why LinkedIn is this way and other platforms are not.
> Maybe I missed it in the article but ... why should we be talking about LinkedIn relative to the other platforms?
I think the title of the article, "Why Aren't We Talking About LinkedIn?" isn't suggesting we should be talking about LinkedIn and are not, but asking us to think about what's special about LinkedIn that makes it exempt from the chatter that plagues other social media sites.
It is a bad title, and does read like clickbait. I think the author/editor is being too clever.
It does seem like a rather redundant article. I actually enjoy linkedin, although it does have some quality control issues these days, its still one of my favorite tools for having jobs presented to me, rather than searching for them myself. I think part of what makes all of this work is that linkedin monetizes user data just like the other major social media sites, but is much more in the business of selling that data directly to companies, mostly recruiting firms I imagine, rather than to advertisers who are just trying to peddle commercial goods to consumers.
If you use linkedin in a manner where your goals and linkedin's goals align, it works great. I use it to get leads on making money, and linkedin uses my desire to make money, to make their own money. Its not perfect, but its win/win for now.
Yeah, I'm not sure what the article is getting it. It's a work-specific forum for mostly white collar workers, so there's a certain degree of self-moderation when it comes to what people post and how they present themselves.
Nope, LinkedIn is in fact the best social website you have this day. I post same content on FB, Twitter and LinkedIn all the time. To my surprise, I get most most engagement on LinkedIn! Not only that but LinkedIn engagement is typically higher value because its not some random dudes and long lost friends liking and moving on but your colleagues and collaborators who you see everyday.
In my view, Twitter as a social media is only useful to those who have won the lottery of a viral tweet and have racked up few thousands followers. Without that you might as well be talking into a empty bucket. As I often say, Twitter is best described as broadcast media for 1% while the rest 99% talks into the black hole.
Facebook is becoming less and less effective social media because it literally ignores majority of posts from friends and instead shows posts from random pages you liked or groups you became member of. On any day, you can click on your individual friends and see astonishing amount of their posts you missed while FB served you all the other clickbaity junk.
This leaves LinkedIn. You see posts from your actual connections and your connections see your posts. Engagements and impact is very real.
- I get so much connection SPAM from LinkedIn that I consider LinkedIn one of the biggest cesspools on the internet. (Mostly recruiters who I've never worked with trying to connect, but sometimes people trying to connect as a way to promote their business.)
If they (LinkedIn) better policed connection SPAM, I'd use it. Maybe I'm in the minority; but constantly getting connection requests from people who I don't know is a major turnoff to me.
That being said, IMO, the observation that LinkedIn has a good tone to its conversations makes it an attractive alternative to platforms like Facebook where the tone turns toxic.
I'm interested in opportunities... I have zero interest in most of the recruiter contacts I get that are just "spam everyone with a single keyword that matches this job / waste their time".
I had a linkedin recruiter tell me about part time job positions at Target, via text message. What part of my resume says I'm looking for part time retail work and wanting it texted to me??
I worked in the datacenter networking industry for 20 years and changed careers. Some of that time could be called "tech support". Then I decided I wanted to do something new so I went into web development.
So what do I get for spam?:
- Overnight desktop support roles ... some that talk about windows 98 (what the hell...).
- Tons of Java inquiries... I don't know Java but JavaScript is on my resume.
- Tons of semi related web dev roles but looking for Sr. people with 10 years experience and I've got all of 1 year experience.
All total wastes of my time. And that's near 100% of my unsolicited contacts.
"I see you were a janitor for three months and you also worked part time as a hand on a construction site during high school. Well based on your experience I thought you would be a great fit for an opportunity I have right now for a contract Maintenance Professional at $NAME Regional Vocational School. If you think you like variety in the work you do, have a great work ethic, and are not afraid of a challenge please contact me at $EMAIL!"
I haven't worked in Java since college and my first job out of college was tech support in 2001. To this day, I still get recruiter SPAM for Java dev and L2 tech support roles. Nevermind that I've been a SQL Server Dev and DBA for the past 16 years!
Simple solve is to remove those keywords from your profile, and only keep keywords for jobs you want. Even changing Java Developer title to something generic as Software Engineer.
Many Recruiters/Sourcers spam everyone that come up in their keyword search and don't read the profile.
I love when they tell me they're impressed by my experience it tech that I've never used. I know that they just write a generic message and shotgun blast it to as many people as possible, but it's still so annoying to read.
Yeah, I never say that I've had anything to do with SharePoint or ColdFusion online because then I either get people who want to sell me something indescribable or want me to clean up a mess that's older than some of you.
> I get so much connection SPAM from LinkedIn that I consider LinkedIn one of the biggest cesspools on the internet. (Mostly recruiters who I've never worked with trying to connect, but sometimes people trying to connect as a way to promote their business.)
In my case it's mostly the latter that drives me nuts and happens very frequently.
LinkedIn's official Community Guidelines[1] have this to say under the section "2. Be Professional" -> "Honesty and Authenticity":
> Do not invite people you do not know to join your network
You used to be able to report people for abusing that policy by saying "I don't know this person" after you declined the invite. However, LinkedIn are phasing that functionality out[2].
If LinkedIn wasn't overflowing with incessant spam, then it could actually be a valuable service for professionals. However, it's mostly a waste of time because there's zero quality control.
> You used to be able to report people for abusing that policy by saying "I don't know this person" after you declined the invite. However, LinkedIn are phasing that functionality out
Because Microsoft realizes that the only people who actively use LinkedIn are recruiters and foreign outsourcing salespeople (posing as hot girls) trying to weasel into the networks of people they don't know. Monetizing what used to be unacceptable behavior on the network is the only way for them to make it profitable.
Don’t they make money off of the spam? Recruiters pay for premium access and they can send you a message. Then a few days later LinkedIn will remind me AGAIN that “Sanjay from Recruiting Associates in Bangalore wants to connect, WHY HAVENT YOU MESSAGED HIM”. Then if you accept they’ll let you know about a low pay 6-month contract in a programming language you don’t know halfway across the country.
I became so annoyed with LinkedIn I added every filter I could think of to block all email that even mentions LinkedIn. I don't care if I miss opportunities. I like the freedom from distraction
.
You can configure your email preferences and you can even delete your account. Setting up filtering rules on the word "LinkedIn" in the body of any email doesn't seem like the best strategy to me.
You really can’t configure your email preferences. I have unchecked spam boxes on LinkedIn’s configuration page no fewer than 5 times in the last 5 years, but they keep inventing new categories and default-enabling them. They know exactly what they’re doing, and it isn’t nice.
> - I get so much connection SPAM from LinkedIn that I consider LinkedIn one of the biggest cesspools on the internet. (Mostly recruiters who I've never worked with trying to connect, but sometimes people trying to connect as a way to promote their business.)
I deleted LinkedIn for these reasons two. I was on the platform for years and not once ever got a job out it. Why bother?
If you want my resume, I'll send it to you. If you want to see my work, go to my website.
One way to reduce connection spam is to change the primary CTA on your profile from Connect to Follow. That way it takes a few more clicks to send you a connection request.
You can tune your privacy settings and make it a lot more usable. Also, never ever instal the app on any of your phones.
That’s what I did and it’s working fine for me.
Also, it’s nice to have sone kind of social network without the drama of other social networks.
Last but not the least, sometimes some old ex-colleagues manage to sneak an old onside joke in a comment or in a review, and that makes me smile and brings good memories back to my mind. I sincerely appreciate this last thing as I do not have a Facebook profile.
You're talking about a step waaay further along in the process. I'm not currently looking for a job, and my linkedin profile says as much. Despite this, I still get so many recruiters asking to add themselves to my network that I ended up blocking those notifications from linkedin entirely, which probably has resulted in me missing non-spam requests from people I actually would want to connect with. I'm not going to waste my time responding to spam.
Oh, I'm sure they have "crossed lines" if by that you mean, gave data to the intelligence agencies or allowed them to mine all that data in some fashion. I'm sure they have.
I am deeply suspicious now of all these social networking sites. We're constructing a digital tyranny the likes of which the world has never seen and you, but more likely your (our) children, and your (our) grandchildren are going to curse us for doing this to them.
But if you want less "tinfoil" of a response, I think LinkedIn is a lie in many ways. They make regular people think they can network using this online tool and that networking is easy but the reality is that it is of limited use and that real go-getters network the old-fashioned way.
Collectively people seem have terrible memories. LinkedIn is mega creepy. It was pulling moves like asking for email passwords and then downloading entire contact lists[1] long before Facebook got in trouble for the same thing. Others here have noted LinkedIn’s UI “dark patterns” which are also some of the worst in the social space.
Linkedin is a platform that seemingly no one except recruiters and "entrepreneurs" actually use as a social network. Linkedin is a great resource when used as a kind of living resume, but it falls pretty flat as a social network because it doesn't really fill any niche that other social media platforms don't.
That said, there is definitely a slimy underbelly of Linkedin that's filled with narcissists and braggadocios who spin self-aggrandizing tall tales. They're mostly harmless, but I could imagine it devolving into something more toxic if it's left unchecked, the way that many other social media platforms have.
There's a great twitter account @StateOfLinkedin that catalogs the most ridiculous of the blow-hards that's pretty entertaining
I disagree. I use it as a way to stay in touch with ex-colleagues who have moved on to new organizations and I wasn't close enough to have their personal contact details but they will go for coffee with me so helpful networking.
It's useful as an auto-updating Rolodex. I know there have been a number of those over the years and LinkedIn purports to be a lot more. But I don't really use the "more" part much. I don't even have a particularly fleshed out resume on it, in part, because any opportunity I'd likely have any real interest in would come from personal contacts.
There's a lot of professional humblebragging on LinkedIn, which can have similar depression-inducing effect like FB and Instagram. I think it's much worse effect than recruiters.
LinkedIn is really bad at having a decent discussion.
There is a limit to the comment length. It’s really hard to keep track of discussion.
I find my feed relevant but the mobile experience and predictability of the timeline needs some work, imo. I’d love to have some discovery options but my timeline should be predictable.
You can, but HN hides it (presumably to prevent abuse). Go to the individual item ID (click the time of the comment) and there's a "flag" hyperlink:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20654314
I'm using LinkedIn to stay in touch with a few people network-wise and avoid littering them with too personal information (as on Facebook, Instagram, whatever.)
It would be pretty cool, but they do exactly the same mistake as Facebook. Their timeline does not provide useful information. If you follow a company (because /sometimes/ you want to see what's going on, their posts are as important as the ones from your network. If you see a post from one of your contacts, hit refresh and it is gone.
I recently did my first own post on LinkedIn. Despite discussion from my network, LinkedIn thought it's not important for my timeline.
IMO LinkedIn is one of the more compelling online social networks for two reasons:
1.) The platform’s incentives are well aligned with the user’s incentives. The platform makes money if recruiters can make money by offering jobs to users.
You could argue that recruiter spam is a problem but it would then be a problem for the product and the users. Facebook on the other hand has much less incentive to stop selling ads at the user’s detriment.
2.) It facilitates social interactions that are not necessarily possible IRL. You can reach out to people of interest even if you don’t know them personally. The formality means that we can start conversations with some degree of formality.
LinkedIn is the worst content experience of all available social networks, and that's the trade-off here. It's stricter social boundaries, but as the context has shifted to "social selling", it's more of a vapid marketeering platform than genuine thoughtful exchanges. But hey, at least it's less toxic?
I absolutely am on LinkedIn. My only accounts online are HN and LinkedIn. While I agree that it has excessive recruiter spam, I politely respond to every single one of them, telling them where my career is, and what I would need to move. It only takes a minute to do so, and builds a network. Admittedly, most cannot meet my needs, but I have connections to almost every company in my area, so if I ever do need to move, it is not difficult to get rolling. I have found every single job I've held since 2007 from LinkedIn (Admittedly, that is only 3.)
But I don't talk on LinkedIn. I don't 'like' anything, I don't engage with any posts. I'd wager that 90% of what I see on the feeds is just marketing blurbs from my connections' employers. It isn't meaningful to me, so I mostly ignore it.
For me, LinkedIn is a great place to hold my resume, maintain connections to recruiters and former co-workers... and that is it.
Same. I actually wrote the Ask A Manager site to see if I was being rude by just blocking people I don't know - if that had the potential to cost me down the road. Her response was that they expect that, so I feel free to use LinkedIn less as a social media site and more a living rolodex.
There was a comment or link I read on here several years ago that I think best defines LinkedIn - paraphrasing:
A trading card game played by white males where the aim is to amass as many connections as possible
Honestly, to the people I don’t know who add me with no note, or the people who add with a generic ‘I am looking to expand my professional network’, or even more generic, ‘I see we have connections in common’ - why!?
It can also pose a security risk. People are pretty quick to list the tech products they work with (including security products). It's a useful source for info gathering during a penetration test.
Not just in the security field, I've heard of multiple games leaked through LinkedIn as well, this [0] was the most recent one I can remember but isn't a unique example. There is certainly the opportunity to inadvertently leak sensitive information, and there are people who know this and watch the platform.
I've long deleted my Facebook account. Tried LinkedIn recently, thinking it won't suck much time and will be a bit more privacy respecting than Facebook and the like--but boy was I wrong. I found LinkedIn more aggressively attention and details grabbing. I felt that it nags us to comment on others post and update our profiles recently. The e-mail notification frequency was so high that I thought to delete the account right away but then found out that we can turn it off selectively. I don't know the plight of Facebook now but it shows us even more reasons to glue to our profile/upgrade to the premium plan like "You've been searched X times this week". The more data and attention they get, more can they make from premium accounts. It's no better from Facebook and such from these two perspectives(attention and privacy).
I closed my LI account last year as I don't derive any benefit from it and was irked by the constant Social Network -like prods it gave me.
32 days later - 2 days after they say they'll permanently delete your details - I found myself having to sign up for it again as someone in Asia had decided to promote themselves as a director in my business. The only way I could get him booted off was by joining up again so I could prove who I was (no such proof required for my apparent boss..).
The odd thing was, it still had quite a lot of my details kept on file, despite having suggested they'd all be deleted.
Now I just ignore its regular emails, including the 10 desperate pleas I've had this year asking if I know someone I once interviewed with about 18 years ago and who evidently still has my email in their address book.
The information that LinkedIn has about me isn't something I care to keep private, i.e. my accomplishments. I don't share any personal information on LinkedIn, and LinkedIn doesn't really ask for any, other than maybe email and phone, but they are hardly important to the overall functionality. I got my most recent job through LinkedIn.
171 comments
[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 113 ms ] threadI assure you that there are plenty of people posing the same click-bait, politically inflammatory comments on LinkedIn that you would expect on Facebook.
I had to google the meaning of 'anodyne' but i knew it was going to mean something along the lines of 'stale', 'bland', 'generic', 'not to offend'
That is pretty much it. As for the rest of the article it just elaborates on that and I'm not sure I understand what the article is asking.
Maybe I missed it in the article but ... why should we be talking about LinkedIn relative to the other platforms? It is just a site with very a specific use case that isn't what the other sites do.
There's also some insinuation that LinkedIn is some super corporate friendly place. Maybe it is but you know what, AS A USER (not a corporation) I also DO NOT WANT LinkedIn to be Facebook. It might seem corporate friendly, but I'm willing to bet most users want things the way they are as far as not being Facebook as well.
Side note: I really hate questions in titles like this. It's like some attention begging non specific "oh woe is me" social media post. Just tell me what exactly the topic is.
I also do not want to be "friends with my grandma or neighbour" on LinkedIn...
One I encountered was a recruiter who I actually liked so I went out of my way to message her and say "I'm just not sure everyone seeing that message feels the same way and on LinkedIn that might not be the best thing to post as far as being a recruiter."
She was all "I'm just being patriotic."
We had a pleasant exchange after that and I don't see her post that stuff anymore.
Normally I wouldn't do that but she struck me as young, naive, not a lot of life experience.... but also genuinely interested in what other people think and I thought it was worth a shot. I was fortunate.
I would strongly suggest you make your own assessment as far as how well that works out as far as people wanting to hear it or not / listening / the results.
Next time you see a comment thread on LinkedIn, look who is responding. In my experience it is overwhelmingly founders and not employees. People that work for others have their speech chilled. People that work with others get benefits from having opinions, and do not have the consequence of income disruption and industry blacklisting.
Likewise, to the degree that your goal at your workplace is career advancement (and again, assuming meritocratic promotion over cronyism), you shouldn’t be having political discourse there, either.
But do note that “political discourse” has a specific meaning here—something is only political discourse if there are multiple potential positions likely to crop up in any discussion amongst arbitrary people in the room. If everyone in the room agrees on all the issues to the point that they think they’re “obvious”, then no political discourse is happening even if a normally-political issue is being discussed, so there is no risk of career impact. For example, discussing attending pride rallies in the break-room of an SF-based company is entirely safe. Hanging a patriotic slogan on the wall of your cubicle in a government organization is entirely safe. Etc.
This effect never applies if you’re posting your thoughts on the public Internet, though. There’s always someone “in the room” who disagrees, when the room contains 7bn people.
But sometimes (often), people do what they want without considering or being aware of social norms or consequences.
If you're aware of social norms and consequences, make whatever decision you want as an informed, consenting adult.
If you're blissfully unaware of social norms and/or consequences, it is tricky (because of its own social norms:P), but people may try to help you be aware of them.
Personally, I would neither want to discuss politics on LinkedIn or care for others to do so. It's not what LinkedIn as a platform is for, as far as I'm concerned. I don't go to my car dealership to get a beer, I don't interrupt the CIO's presentation to discuss the soccer results, and I don't care for politics on LinkedIn - they each have their own domain. But you may do as you choose :).
At work, it's a lot more fluid - in many environments discussing politics at work is "not a good idea" - why start a heated fight with a co-worker on opposite spectrum if you otherwise respect each other and work well? Or unknowingly jeopardize your chances of promotion because your boss vehemently disagrees with your political views? Or, possibly the worst, you yourself subconsciously not promote or develop your team member because you are now biased due to their differing political views? (it's huge hubris to claim "Oh no I wouldn't be impacted like that").
Other places, small startups of like-minded people, it'll naturally be a subject of conversation.
And in between, even at large corporate settings, you may develop friendship with people who are either like-minded, or open to productive interesting discussion.
But overall message is, know your audience, know the social norms, know the consequences. And then do as you please :)
Otherwise, you need to use discretion, especially now that many people are nationally and globally connected. If you're the type who discusses politics loudly in front of the office, you've already reaped the rewards/punishment for doing so, and LinkedIn will magnify both.
Oh, you can - you just had better make sure you have the Right Opinions before you do. If you wonder what the Right Opinions are, browse through LinkedIn and see what's getting "upvoted".
Depending on the industry, her connections, and career goals, that might be a very rational decision. If your professional network or aspirations involve national-security or Federal contracting then posting some patriotic ooh-rah posts is just her virtue signalling her allegiances to those she works with.
The area around me has loads of Federal work, and you see those types of posts all the time from folks in that industry. Similarly, I have contacts in private sector at companies that are really big into social-justice causes. Those folks will post all kinds of work-unrelated content of that variety.
One chap I recently connected with posted every couple of hours. Links to news stories, a load of hashtags and nothing of particular interest.
However, I still want to remain connected to him, so I just unfollowed him.
I think these people fall into 1 of 2 groups, which explains the "why":
1. They're trying to be a "thought leader" on a particular topic (to get more/better job offers in the future).
2. To grow awareness of a brand.
In a lot of cases they're probably doing more harm than good, but in some cases it is a cheap and easy way to get a lot of attention (which is also why it bothers us, and that is how they're doing harm).
But I really do get a lot of support from having an opinion or posting a perspective on a nuanced topic.
It basically took me coming to terms with not expecting to work for anybody anymore. I am not worried about recruiters and hiring managers taking a dim view of opinions.
But other movers and shakers really do listen, its made it easier to get into rooms, get capital, get acquirers, get legal and the attention of people I want and also didn't know I wanted.
It is a positive feedback loop and I know plenty of employees with opinions are not speaking or liking publicly. Its very similar to following sexy instagram accounts but you don't like or comment anything because your significant other and their friends and potential other mates will take a dim view on what you say. An employer/employee relationship is the same way and describes LinkedIn behavior.
In addition, besides anonymity, people are far worse online because there is no real person they are interacting with. They are interacting with a caricature of a person they've built up in their heads based on a highly limited set of information.
Finally, you lose all sorts of body language, tone, and other cues, that prevent you from actually interacting with someone, and instead has you interacting with your vision of them, which is highly influenced by your emotional state and preconceived notion of what you think they're saying.
I don't think it's reasonable to put the blame on the users. Facebook in particular, creates that caricature in order to increase "engagement".
You will not see a representative sample, much less all, of your friends posts if you use it normally. If two people make one in 20 posts that are outraged, anguished, political, Facebook will probably show them only those of each other, which creates a feedback loop.
People talk about possible future "paperclip maximizer" AIs overwhelming society, but Facebook is essentially doing that right now, only it's "engagement" instead of "paperclips".
If I see you posting one of those “a great leader...” or any meme/Facebook types post, you’re removed as a connection instantly however. Because I really don’t want my LinkedIn feed to turn into Facebook. That’s not activity though, it’s a matter of what content people share, and I value a lot of activity if it’s interesting.
But maybe I’m alone in this?
Groups are different- though it boggles my mind that LinkedIn missed the opportunity to beat Slack on creating useful professional communities with such a head start...
I don't have a problem with this necessarily; after you have worked a while and have several hundred connections+ it is a great way to keep up with what people are doing, so long as they are posting something substantial (new job, press release, etc) and not reposts of empty quotes about innovation from Steve Jobs, Richard Branson, Vishnepolsky, etc.
I usually unfollow rather than disconnect. Disconnecting means I don't want to have anything to do with this person professionally, and you never know when a connection to someone might be useful.
LinkedIn is supposed to be the social network for business. Despite my disappointment with them on a number of levels and my low level of usage as a result, their proposition as a company isn't hard to grasp and I don't understand why it's so difficult for others to get it.
On that note, I've heard of creepy people treating LinkedIn like it's a dating site. So it's just like an office in the bad ways too.
I've received linkedin connection requests from people I have only met for a couple hours in a meeting. I've sent a few here and there as well. These requests in a business context are standard fare, but friending someone on a social media network (like Facebook) after a brief meeting could be considered odd, and perhaps in some circumstances even inappropriate.
in a way, it's a walled facebook that is already worse than facebook.
The fact they mentioned the number of content editors/mods high up in the article rather than some specific privacy issues or bad incidents says everything about the why.
There’s a strong interest in how SV is self regulating speech online.
I really do think the users also want it the way it is.
LinkedIn is interesting because it has a notion of identity and social norms based on rewards that enforce reasonable behavior. The content does not pose a threat to democracy (for example) and it's actually very helpful for professionals. I depend on it and use it every day. At least some of this is not the use case but the structure of the social interaction and how behavior is tied to real-life consequences.
It's worth looking at why LinkedIn is this way and other platforms are not.
I think the title of the article, "Why Aren't We Talking About LinkedIn?" isn't suggesting we should be talking about LinkedIn and are not, but asking us to think about what's special about LinkedIn that makes it exempt from the chatter that plagues other social media sites.
It is a bad title, and does read like clickbait. I think the author/editor is being too clever.
If you use linkedin in a manner where your goals and linkedin's goals align, it works great. I use it to get leads on making money, and linkedin uses my desire to make money, to make their own money. Its not perfect, but its win/win for now.
Because this article is about LinkedIn.
Maybe you should write an article about all of the platforms everywhere, so we can have a good discussion about all of them at once.
It's asking for clicks and ad revenue.
Nope, LinkedIn is in fact the best social website you have this day. I post same content on FB, Twitter and LinkedIn all the time. To my surprise, I get most most engagement on LinkedIn! Not only that but LinkedIn engagement is typically higher value because its not some random dudes and long lost friends liking and moving on but your colleagues and collaborators who you see everyday.
In my view, Twitter as a social media is only useful to those who have won the lottery of a viral tweet and have racked up few thousands followers. Without that you might as well be talking into a empty bucket. As I often say, Twitter is best described as broadcast media for 1% while the rest 99% talks into the black hole.
Facebook is becoming less and less effective social media because it literally ignores majority of posts from friends and instead shows posts from random pages you liked or groups you became member of. On any day, you can click on your individual friends and see astonishing amount of their posts you missed while FB served you all the other clickbaity junk.
This leaves LinkedIn. You see posts from your actual connections and your connections see your posts. Engagements and impact is very real.
Two reasons:
- I don't need another Facebook
- I get so much connection SPAM from LinkedIn that I consider LinkedIn one of the biggest cesspools on the internet. (Mostly recruiters who I've never worked with trying to connect, but sometimes people trying to connect as a way to promote their business.)
If they (LinkedIn) better policed connection SPAM, I'd use it. Maybe I'm in the minority; but constantly getting connection requests from people who I don't know is a major turnoff to me.
That being said, IMO, the observation that LinkedIn has a good tone to its conversations makes it an attractive alternative to platforms like Facebook where the tone turns toxic.
I'm interested in opportunities... I have zero interest in most of the recruiter contacts I get that are just "spam everyone with a single keyword that matches this job / waste their time".
I worked in the datacenter networking industry for 20 years and changed careers. Some of that time could be called "tech support". Then I decided I wanted to do something new so I went into web development.
So what do I get for spam?:
- Overnight desktop support roles ... some that talk about windows 98 (what the hell...).
- Tons of Java inquiries... I don't know Java but JavaScript is on my resume.
- Tons of semi related web dev roles but looking for Sr. people with 10 years experience and I've got all of 1 year experience.
All total wastes of my time. And that's near 100% of my unsolicited contacts.
Many Recruiters/Sourcers spam everyone that come up in their keyword search and don't read the profile.
Software Engineer is going to be a keyword too.
In my case it's mostly the latter that drives me nuts and happens very frequently.
LinkedIn's official Community Guidelines[1] have this to say under the section "2. Be Professional" -> "Honesty and Authenticity":
> Do not invite people you do not know to join your network
You used to be able to report people for abusing that policy by saying "I don't know this person" after you declined the invite. However, LinkedIn are phasing that functionality out[2].
If LinkedIn wasn't overflowing with incessant spam, then it could actually be a valuable service for professionals. However, it's mostly a waste of time because there's zero quality control.
[1] LinkedIn Community Guidelines - https://www.linkedin.com/help/linkedin/answer/34593?lang=en
[2] Removal of "I don't know this person" - https://www.reddit.com/r/linkedin/comments/ccaky7/linkedin_r...
Because Microsoft realizes that the only people who actively use LinkedIn are recruiters and foreign outsourcing salespeople (posing as hot girls) trying to weasel into the networks of people they don't know. Monetizing what used to be unacceptable behavior on the network is the only way for them to make it profitable.
> - I get so much connection SPAM from LinkedIn that I consider LinkedIn one of the biggest cesspools on the internet. (Mostly recruiters who I've never worked with trying to connect, but sometimes people trying to connect as a way to promote their business.)
I deleted LinkedIn for these reasons two. I was on the platform for years and not once ever got a job out it. Why bother?
If you want my resume, I'll send it to you. If you want to see my work, go to my website.
See https://www.socialmediatoday.com/news/now-you-can-switch-you...
That’s what I did and it’s working fine for me.
Also, it’s nice to have sone kind of social network without the drama of other social networks.
Last but not the least, sometimes some old ex-colleagues manage to sneak an old onside joke in a comment or in a review, and that makes me smile and brings good memories back to my mind. I sincerely appreciate this last thing as I do not have a Facebook profile.
Do not budge until you get this (do not take a call).
It forces them to put skin in the game and gives you information on market rate for your time.
Even if you have already made up your mind that you are not interested, I do this and then disengage by saying sorry that is below my market rate.
The fact that LinkedIn allows this usage pattern pretty much turns me off of the entire site.
There, wrote your entire article for you.
I am deeply suspicious now of all these social networking sites. We're constructing a digital tyranny the likes of which the world has never seen and you, but more likely your (our) children, and your (our) grandchildren are going to curse us for doing this to them.
But if you want less "tinfoil" of a response, I think LinkedIn is a lie in many ways. They make regular people think they can network using this online tool and that networking is easy but the reality is that it is of limited use and that real go-getters network the old-fashioned way.
[1] https://nakedsecurity.sophos.com/2013/09/24/linkedin-denies-...
That said, there is definitely a slimy underbelly of Linkedin that's filled with narcissists and braggadocios who spin self-aggrandizing tall tales. They're mostly harmless, but I could imagine it devolving into something more toxic if it's left unchecked, the way that many other social media platforms have.
There's a great twitter account @StateOfLinkedin that catalogs the most ridiculous of the blow-hards that's pretty entertaining
Not really, since it locks your CV behind a login-wall.
I find my feed relevant but the mobile experience and predictability of the timeline needs some work, imo. I’d love to have some discovery options but my timeline should be predictable.
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19590585
Pagedin lets you create events to share with friends, book restaurants, attractions and services.
iOS users can download the beta version via TestFlight. https://testflight.apple.com/join/IPITLy7T
For more info, queries and suggestions Email: team@pagedin.co.uk www.pagedin.co.uk
It would be pretty cool, but they do exactly the same mistake as Facebook. Their timeline does not provide useful information. If you follow a company (because /sometimes/ you want to see what's going on, their posts are as important as the ones from your network. If you see a post from one of your contacts, hit refresh and it is gone.
I recently did my first own post on LinkedIn. Despite discussion from my network, LinkedIn thought it's not important for my timeline.
You could argue that recruiter spam is a problem but it would then be a problem for the product and the users. Facebook on the other hand has much less incentive to stop selling ads at the user’s detriment.
2.) It facilitates social interactions that are not necessarily possible IRL. You can reach out to people of interest even if you don’t know them personally. The formality means that we can start conversations with some degree of formality.
2011: Opened an a/c on LinkedIn with colleagues, soon Managers posted recommendations on request. Left it defunct there, stop updating profile since.
I always argued team-bonding happens at office during actual office work.
LinkedIn might help if you're between jobs, but then so does job-sites.
But I don't talk on LinkedIn. I don't 'like' anything, I don't engage with any posts. I'd wager that 90% of what I see on the feeds is just marketing blurbs from my connections' employers. It isn't meaningful to me, so I mostly ignore it.
For me, LinkedIn is a great place to hold my resume, maintain connections to recruiters and former co-workers... and that is it.
A trading card game played by white males where the aim is to amass as many connections as possible
Honestly, to the people I don’t know who add me with no note, or the people who add with a generic ‘I am looking to expand my professional network’, or even more generic, ‘I see we have connections in common’ - why!?
[0] https://www.gamesradar.com/red-dead-redemption-2-is-being-ma...
I went from 350 connections to about 80. My feed became clear as a result. I also removed all the recruiters which found there way in.
32 days later - 2 days after they say they'll permanently delete your details - I found myself having to sign up for it again as someone in Asia had decided to promote themselves as a director in my business. The only way I could get him booted off was by joining up again so I could prove who I was (no such proof required for my apparent boss..).
The odd thing was, it still had quite a lot of my details kept on file, despite having suggested they'd all be deleted.
Now I just ignore its regular emails, including the 10 desperate pleas I've had this year asking if I know someone I once interviewed with about 18 years ago and who evidently still has my email in their address book.