\n<\/p>\n
LinkedIn<\/a> knows it has an AI problem.\u00a0<\/p>\n Last month, the professional networking platform started giving users a way to flag posts and comments they believe were created by AI<\/a>, using a \u201cseems like AI slop\u201d reporting button, The Wall Street Journal<\/em><\/a> recently reported. The move aims to slow the flood of AI-created content.\u00a0<\/p>\n LinkedIn isn\u2019t alone. Most major social media platforms<\/a> have tried to curb the rise of AI-generated posts, largely by relying on automated labels. It\u2019s an approach with a spotty record, leaving some AI work unlabeled and mislabeling some human-created content as AI.<\/p>\n For example, social media star Nikolai Savic<\/a>, who has five million followers on TikTok, is well-known for his creative cooking videos. He told the Journal<\/em><\/a> last month that TikTok labeled some of his videos as AI-generated, even though he painstakingly edited them himself. The move caused him to lose credibility with fans.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cPeople already have in their minds that I\u2019m only using AI,\u201d Savic said. \u201cThis hurt my reputation so much. And at TikTok, nobody really seems to care.\u201d<\/p>\n The stakes may be higher for LinkedIn<\/a>, which sells itself as a trusted place to find useful information, build professional relationships and uncover career opportunities for its more than one billion members<\/a>.\u00a0<\/p>\n Many LinkedIn users turn to AI<\/a> hoping it will help them communicate more clearly or post more often. Executives and industry observers caution that the result can be content that feels bland, overly polished or inauthentic.<\/p>\n Brendan Gahan<\/a> is the co-founder and CEO of Creator Authority<\/a>, a LinkedIn influencer marketing agency. He told the Journal<\/em> that \u201ceverybody uses AI to some degree.\u201d However, he advises influencers to skip posting AI-generated content because it could damage their credibility. Success on the platform ultimately depends on credibility, he said.\u00a0<\/p>\n LinkedIn has encountered content problems before, like oversharing<\/a> and scam job posts<\/a>. \u201cWe have been working on this domain of low-quality content for a long time,\u201d Oscar Rodriguez, LinkedIn\u2019s vice president of product, told the Journal<\/em>.<\/p>\n AI is testing the platform on a much larger scale.\u00a0<\/p>\n From April through June, 41% of LinkedIn\u2019s long-form public posts and 30% of its public comments were entirely AI-generated, according to Pangram Labs<\/a>, an AI-detection startup that analyzed nearly 57,000 pieces of content. The company found that LinkedIn<\/a> had a higher concentration of AI-generated long posts than X, at 29%, and Reddit, at 13%.<\/p>\n Originality.ai<\/a>, another AI-detection company, reached an even more striking conclusion. After reviewing 5,000 public LinkedIn posts in July, it determined that 81% showed more than a moderate amount of AI use. By comparison, just under half of the 5,500 public Reddit posts it reviewed met that same threshold.<\/p>\n LinkedIn disputed the research findings to the Journal<\/em>, but did not share comparable results of its own.\u00a0<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n LinkedIn<\/a> knows it has an AI problem.\u00a0<\/p>\n Last month, the professional networking platform started giving users a way to flag posts and comments they believe were created by AI<\/a>, using a \u201cseems like AI slop\u201d reporting button, The Wall Street Journal<\/em><\/a> recently reported. The move aims to slow the flood of AI-created content.\u00a0<\/p>\n LinkedIn isn\u2019t alone. Most major social media platforms<\/a> have tried to curb the rise of AI-generated posts, largely by relying on automated labels. It\u2019s an approach with a spotty record, leaving some AI work unlabeled and mislabeling some human-created content as AI.<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\nAI as a new challenge<\/h2>\n
Key Takeaways<\/h2>\n
\n