I actually did go off the platform, only checking a few times to see where the discourse was headed.

It has felt great. No despair from seeing the stupid AI prompt clickbait posts, more time to work on my clients’ marketing projects, blog, and creative writing.

I’m going to stay off LinkedIn for a while.

How LinkedIn went from “less is more” to “more is less”

Back in May 2024, my LinkedIn feed was a waterfall of grindset and broetry.

“Five things I wish I’d known when starting my first company…”

“Once I learned to say no…”

“Never say never.”

Over the next months, while Instagram was having its brat summer, thousands of aspiring business influencers were sweating out three LinkedIn posts per day in content-creator bootcamps.

Had it not been for so many content programs, simultaneously producing self-proclaimed authors (many of whom went on to launch their own programs, oh the downwards spiral), it’s unlikely the cringy posts would have pulled so much traction.

The reason why the posts featuring selfies and life-changing yet mysteriously identical stories of dropping out of college, landing dream jobs, and talking to strangers on streets got all that engagement is that commenting, too, was a checklist exercise towards LinkedIn stardom.

In hindsight, the definition of brat—accepting your imperfections while embracing chaos—seems also like a pertinent descriptor for the pre-ChatGPT era LinkedIn zeitgeist.

Perhaps, 2024 will go down in the annals as the height of civilisation LinkedIn.

Ruminating about my recent LinkedIn fatigue which covers all the available forms of the sensation (physical, mental, emotional, social, moral), I thought of a concept that applies to any social media platform.

In the early days, there’s the online forum-like stage of less is more, where a small community of users engages in a genuine conversation.

This is followed by the general-adoption phase of more is more, where still few enough people publish quality posts, resulting in high engagement, rapid follower growth, and, ideally, income.

Finally, as the barrier of entry gets lower (new tools, free guides) and becoming an influencer is democratically available to anyone, we arrive at the era of more is less, a.k.a. the end of civilisation.

This made me think of the final sequence of Antonioni’s Zabriskie Point (1970) – just beautiful!

Swimming drowning in online slop

Obviously, I’m not the first to note that AI-generated content is shaping the world for worse by impoverishing it of original ideas and intelligent meaning.

​Research published in late 2024 reported that as of October 2024, ca 54% of long-form posts on LinkedIn were AI-generated.

In a recent New York Magazine article, Max Read wrote about the “rising tide of slop [that] has begun to swamp most of what we think of as the internet, overrunning the biggest platforms with cheap fakes and drivel, seeming to crowd out human creativity and intentionality with weird AI crap.”

In my LinkedIn feed, the slop overtake manifests in thousands of posts promising AI prompts, cheatsheets, and breakdowns of X-billion revenue success stories.

Yes, you can do all three in a single post.

The awful thing—or at least what’s so disgusting about it for me—is not that 90% of these posts are copies of other posts, rewritten with AI.

It’s that thousands of people are commenting “prompt” to get access without ever questioning whether the author has ever achieved anything other than 1,000 comments under a LinkedIn post.

It’s that everyone now believes that accessing a half-page Google Doc with an AI prompt will make them rich and famous in 10 minutes instead of hours of real hard work, not to mention thought.

Comment “Vibe marketing”

What really got me was the flood of posts promising AI prompts for auto-generating ad creatives with the latest ChatGPT version.

According to the so-called vibe marketers, you can make millions by selling anything. All you need is AI-generated ads.

Under a single LinkedIn post, 14,260 people decided: Me, too, can create 20 GREAT ads in 10 mins WITH JUST VIBES.

Sorry but LOL.

​

Here’s what’s ironic about this.

As someone who’s spent millions on Meta ad campaigns for 30+ brands, I can tell in 10 seconds that none of the creatives featured in that post would perform well.

All lack a strong value proposition, a promo offer, and a big fat CTA button, to point out only three most obvious shortcomings.

Sometimes, I’ve commented “prompt” out of sheer interest.

Whenever I test those prompts, the resulting ad images are worse than what I could design on Figma in 10 minutes. They’re literally useless.

One more rant and then I’m done, promise.

Last week, i saw a LinkedIn post by a marketing expert saying she booked 20 new leads by commenting under 100 LinkedIn posts over 5 days.

I checked her past 5 days’ comments. (Yes, I do regret wasting my time on this.)

There were eight (not 100), and I can’t possibly imagine which one of the “Exiting news!” or “Thanks for sharing your insights” exclamations got anyone interested in hiring her.

As I couldn’t find the post for this essay, I searched LinkedIn for “20 meetings booked” and realised it was yet another post in yet another copy-and-AI craze.

This is depressing in so many ways.

One of them being that shitposting 5-7 times per week works.

Or does it?

It works for getting likes, comments, and followers.

Does it bring new leads, deals, and clients? – Not in the world I’m living in. (More on this later.)

Preach without practice

What happened to “Practice what you preach” – a LinkedIn post opener that just 12 months ago, one would regularly encounter?

It was flipped into preach without practice.

The overwhelming tsunami of LinkedIn content has led to a point where seeing a LinkedIn post that claims 20 new leads in 10 minutes, instead of questioning the author’s sanity we skip to the comments and type “cheatsheet.”

Don’t get me wrong. It’s not all awful.

There are brilliant subject matter experts using LinkedIn as their primary marketing & growth channel.

Like Maja Voje and Kyle Polar. Like Emily Sundberg and Rachel Karten.

What makes a difference—what makes these authors’ posts authentic and useful—is that they all have 10y+ experience in the industry, and writing a business newsletter is (mostly) their full-time job.

The problem is people with no real experience framing themselves as industry experts at 10min per day.

And who can blame them?

They’ve paid for a content creator workshop.

They’re following the exact checklist & AI prompts catalogue provided by their (self)-qualified coach.

They’ve commented “prompt” under a LinkedIn post with hundreds of comments and must now use it to create more, more, more content—a horrible word in itself.

Most importantly, the posts they generate with Chat GPT or Claude AI or whatever will get hundreds of likes and comments from real people. People like you and me.

No wonder, Sherlock, that this economy of fantastical proficiency leads to content that

a) focuses on cheap virality;

b) is a copy of someone else’s post, which is a copy of someone else’s post, which is… written by AI.
​

I just can’t (do LinkedIn) anymore

I haven’t been able to post on LinkedIn for about two weeks.

It’s not that I’ve lacked ideas.

Rather, I’ve felt a sort of vertiginous revulsion every time I open it in a Chrome window.

The feed is full of false promises, fake expertise, and thousands of people engaging with these.

Why would anyone want to participate, or even contribute?

To learn the latest best practices, build industry relationships, get new clients… You know why!

And all the hours spent on posting, commenting, and liking do pay off, don’t they?

Not in my experience.

Goodbye to all that

I tried active LinkedIn posting from January to April 2025.

Perhaps I didn’t try hard enough – I never reached the 7 posts + 50 comments per week schedule. In a way, I admire the people who can spend several hours daily on the platform. Superhuman stamina.

Posting on LinkedIn helped to grow my newsletter readership, albeit slower than writing a guest article for another newsletter did.

The positive thing about creating these free resources is that they were genuinely helpful for other marketers & founders.

But I might as well have shared them in this newsletter or my blog.

Meanwhile, all my course sales and consulting requests over past 6 months came via referrals and my newsletter (mostly pre-2025 readers).

Not a single new consulting project or course sale came via Linkedin as the first touchpoint.

Instead of spending hours on brainstorming and creating “comment for access” free checklists and libraries, plus more hours designing, writing, and publishing LinkedIn posts…

… I would much rather spend 10h writing a long-form blog article. Or a guest post. Or a newsletter. Or working on an actual project for a client.

Another observation: At least for me, LinkedIn posts got much higher engagement 5-6 months ago compared to April-May 2025.

Every marketer I’ve asked about their LinkedIn engagement confirmed it has dropped.

With more posts and less value, it’ll soon be more efficient to run LinkedIn ads (vs spending billable hours chasing organic reach).

I’m giving up on LinkedIn but… Should you?

In a time when we’re told “you can be doing it all,” doing it all means you can’t do any of it well.

One of the mantras I kept repeating to the participants of my DYI Marketing Audit course was to choose 2-3 marketing channels and focus on scaling them.

As I wrote in a Marketing Fix issue on social media, you should either go ALL IN or ALL OUT on any marketing channel.

We’re surrounded by so much noise.

There’s too much of everything.

The only reasonable response—at least one that I can think of—is to decide what genuinely matters.

The rest you just filter out.

I’m not going to delete my LinkedIn account – I’ll need it for keeping in touch with peers, clients, and colleagues.

But I’m not going to create anything for merely posting on Linkedin.

When I publish a new blog article or newsletter, I’ll share it on LinkedIn as well.

When I have a hot take on something, e.g. Bolt’s brand team flopping their latest campaign because of laziness and cultural ignorance​, I’ll rant about it.

I returned to the crossed-out lines after an evening walk, having realised that I should go full cold turkey on LinkedIn. It only adds anxiety to my life. So I will, at least for the next 3 months. (I use the Texts app on Mac for my LI inbox, so I won’t miss any messages.)

I expect to have a lot more focus time for writing newsletters & blog articles, creating LinkedIn ad strategies & visuals for my clients, planning online courses & conducting marketing audits.

Perhaps, you too have something more meaningful to do with your time than competing with AI and human bots for second-rate attention.

Why not do it?

The post  I Gave Up on LinkedIn. Should you? appeared first on Marketing Fix blog.

There were so many good examples.

Part of my bad-examples-draught problem was that I’d been looking up the top B2B brands’ ads directly in the LinkedIn Ad Library.

Once I switched to my own LinkedIn feed, the quality of creatives dropped significantly.

Hurray, there are still plenty of B2B brands making awful mistakes, I thought.

Once my thumb stopped at a LinkedIn ad by LinkedIn itself, I knew I had hit the goldmine.

LinkedIn’s LinkedIn ad mistakes

Take a look at these three ad examples.

Not necessarily awful, you say?

Well, yes. They look like something of a mediocre B2B brand’s ads from 2010.

But if you’ve looked at some excellent LinkedIn ad examples, you can see what I mean.

Not awful is not great.

No good performance marketer would accept a ROAS (return on ad spend) that’s “not awful.”

Adding insult to injury is the fact that Reddit is absolutely killing it with their LinkedIn ads.

Here are some more LinkedIn for Marketing ad creatives that popped up in my LI feed.

Can you tell the mistakes they’re making?

Let’s take a look at some key mistakes – and ensure you will avoid them in your own paid ads game.

My bet is that if LinkedIn’s paid advertising team would fix these 10 mistakes, their ROAs would improve 2x or more.

The first ad creative is in landscape format, meaning it uses up only about 60% of the total available LinkedIn feed real estate.

The colour scheme is faded and boring; it doesn’t convey excitement.

And the in-image text blends into the background; you have to make an effort to read it.

The other two examples are slightly better. 

However, now they’re missing a call-to-action button.

And there is no illustration of the product or the benefit.

There are too many colours for a single ad creative: dark grey, light green, vintage green, three different blues, and white.

Batch two.

In addition to ad design issues, you can also recognise some copywriting mistakes: weak value proposition and abstract propositions (“shape perceptions”), no social or number-led proof in in-image or ad text.

Speaking of design problems, you shouldn’t be using stock photos in your paid ad creatives. 

Especially in 2025 when it’s incredibly easy to create unique illustrations and images with a little help from AI image generation tools.

I always recommend to my B2B clients not to use stock photos – or images of people in general – on their landing pages and paid ad creatives.

Why?

Whichever picture you select, even if you do make an attempt at diversity, will only be relatable to 5% of all people who see it.

For example, even the diversity-positive pictures in Stocksy – my go-to photo gallery for high-quality pictures – represent a minuscule part of society.

I, as a marketing strategist working with brands with glossy offices, should relate to the people in these photos. It is likely that so should you – a fellow marketer.

But these people are not like me: they recall a generic Netflix office series, not a realistic day-to-day office life.

So what visuals should you use instead of stock images?

To find out, join my B2B ad creatives course here.

But before, copy and save the list of 10 LinkedIn ad creatives mistakes to save your own team from making these blunders.

10 LinkedIn ad creative mistakes to avoid

Don’t make these obvious mistakes:

1. Boring ad image layout
2. Missing call-to-action button
3. No illustration of product or benefit
4. Eclectic colour scheme
5. Generic stock photos
6. Overcrowding ad image with text 
7. Impractical information overload
8. Hidden or missing value proposition
9. Tiny product screenshots
10. No bold headline in ad image

Thanks for reading!

This article first appeared in the Marketing Fix newsletter. 

Join 15,000+ strategic marketers who get bi-weekly secret-sauce growth strategies, free templates, and growth hacks that I’ve learned by consulting 50+ tech and consumer brands.

For more trendy and practical paid advertising advice, subscribe to some of these top marketing newsletters.

The post 10 LinkedIn Ad Mistakes… Made by LinkedIn Itself appeared first on Marketing Fix blog.