I Tried to Use LinkedIn Like a Professional. It Punished Me.
No pods. No performance. No copy-paste influencer tactics. Just thoughtful, useful content—ignored by design.
Act I: The Social Experiment No One Asked For
I decided to try LinkedIn the way it was meant to be used.
Not as a “growth hacker.” Not as a brand. Not as a dopamine merchant.
Just as a professional:
What happened?
Crickets. Ghost town. Zero impressions. No mercy.
Act II: My Reach Died Because I Didn't Dance for the Algorithm
I didn’t:
I just… shared thoughtful work.
And LinkedIn punished me for it.
Act III: I Measured the Results
Over 30 days, I ran a test:
Conclusion? Depth gets buried. Dopamine gets boosted.
Recommended by LinkedIn
Act IV: The Platform Trains Us to Be Performers
Every post you see is the result of algorithmic behavioral conditioning.
LinkedIn doesn’t reward professional behavior. It rewards algorithmic obedience.
What Needs to Change
Final Word
I tried to be a professional. LinkedIn told me I was doing it wrong.
Call to Action
Have you felt punished for not playing the clout game? Comment. Share. Tag someone who still posts with substance.
Let’s rebuild signal—before the platform trains us into content monkeys.
#LinkedInCollapse #AlgorithmObedience #MaverickEA #ProfessionalismVsPerformance #FixTheFeed #DigitalMeritocracy #RealTalk #SubstanceOverClout #MicrosoftListen #PunishedForProfessionalism #SignalMatters
If you enjoyed this article, feel free to check out the whole series:
Please stay tuned, there will be more to come!
I feel this. Substance should win, but the algorithm often rewards noise. That’s why I stopped trying to outguess it. For myself and clients, what works now is a mix of smart paid distribution and testing different formats until the data shows what converts. I even use a custom GPT to create higher intent variations so we can A/B test faster without watering down the substance. In other words, you can still post with substance, you just need a system that makes reach and engagement predictable instead of algorithm roulette.
Right. That shows just how much professionalism is worth today. Perhaps because managers, recruiters and fellow practitioners are not able to judge matters for themselves any longer. So, professionalism pays no longer. But because of that, soon enough our Western economies will sink while the emerging ones, rewarding competence rather than the bragging on Linkedin, will surpass them.
I can feel you, fellow Architect. A good lesson for Market Intelligence: What matters and for who? Who is the audience? And how does it behave? _ It turns out that a crowd, be it linkedin or electors is moved more by fast, inspiring, relatable and emotional - FIRE. Even rationale people behave like this in a crowd. Because they are flooded by a ton of items, and the brain defaults. It takes energy to consume 'substance' in such a crowd mode. So most people WILL default. _ So yes, we have been wrong to assume solid content wins in a crowd... Something sales and politicians got instinctively. So what? What can be the blueprint for communication architecture? - adapt to your market. They will never adapt to you. - once you get their approval, mix in your Substance - but keep a good ratio of FIRE and Substance - there are sociological grounds for crowd behaving this way but it's beyond a comment. Just understand and emotionally accept it
This hits a nerve. Depth should never be punished, yet the algorithm often rewards noise over nuance. Platforms forget that professionals came here for signal, not theater.
I think I might have to try your style. It seems like using this like an actual social platform doesn’t really work anymore.