That’s what changed my view of the back catalogue. I used to think a LinkedIn post had a very short shelf life. Apparently some of them are still working long after the feed forgot them.
I have seen LinkedIn posts pop up lots of times in Perplexity when I ask for them, and of course Google's results contain tons of articles from LinkedIn. You mentioned using long form posts as anchors, too. Would you reckon sending them as newsletters is optional though? Because readers may not like them!
Ah no, you don’t need to send long-form posts as newsletters. They’re just regular posts-longer ones. They sit in the feed, get indexed by Google/Perplexity, do their job.
LinkedIn newsletters are a separate thing entirely (people subscribe, get notifications).
Long-form posts on their own are fine. They get found, they build your authority, no subscription needed.
That makes sense. Thanks for the clarification. I think people may not appreciate long form articles in their inbox like that! So this passive publication makes sense.
I've been wondering why so many AI searches cite LinkedIn these days! I didn't realize this was a larger pattern. LinkedIn presence seems to be becoming a lot more important for discoverability. This is great advice.
Same. I’d seen the citations without really stopping to consider what that meant for everything we publish here. Then I started testing a few searches myself.
That distinction stuck with me too. Being found gets you into the answer. Being worth citing probably means you’ve actually left something useful behind.
LinkedIn content is increasingly becoming part of how professional credibility, expertise, and authority are interpreted by both people and AI systems.
I've also noticed LinkedIn posts and articles are getting indexed far more now, both by Google and by LLMs + a bunch of Google Images results now pull directly from LinkedIn posts. Very insightful read, thank you both!
I don’t do much “searching” with LLMs, but I did notice that every time ChatGPT goes to research something, the LinkedIn icon appears among the sources.
Not enough people are talking about this. But we really are in the AI age. And that we should be searchable by AI and referencable (if that makes sense). Also how long should you be consistent enough so AI recognizes you in your field?
Searchable by AI makes complete sense to me. I’ve started occasionally asking ChatGPT what it knows about me just to see which bits of my work have actually made their way in.
Indeed. Curating a LinkedIn identity is also increasingly a consistent way to maintain your presence on a professional social media platform. AI citations are also increasingly becoming a way of signaling individual relevance, if you think about it.
That longer life is what interests me. I used to think mainly about who might see a post that week. AI search gives old posts another route back to people months later.
Absolutely, LinkedIn is no longer just a networking platform; it is becoming a reputation layer where consistent expertise signals shape how both people and AI perceive your authority.
Most professionals are optimizing for how they look to people, not how they get cited by machines that influence people.
That’s what changed my view of the back catalogue. I used to think a LinkedIn post had a very short shelf life. Apparently some of them are still working long after the feed forgot them.
I have seen LinkedIn posts pop up lots of times in Perplexity when I ask for them, and of course Google's results contain tons of articles from LinkedIn. You mentioned using long form posts as anchors, too. Would you reckon sending them as newsletters is optional though? Because readers may not like them!
Ah no, you don’t need to send long-form posts as newsletters. They’re just regular posts-longer ones. They sit in the feed, get indexed by Google/Perplexity, do their job.
LinkedIn newsletters are a separate thing entirely (people subscribe, get notifications).
Long-form posts on their own are fine. They get found, they build your authority, no subscription needed.
That makes sense. Thanks for the clarification. I think people may not appreciate long form articles in their inbox like that! So this passive publication makes sense.
From optimizing human recruiters to optimizing for AI retrievers. You love to see it.
Just when we thought we’d figured out LinkedIn, along come the robots! Apparently we now have two audiences to please...
Thanks for the LinkedIn pep talk 👏
Any time Chris 😅 Now we just need LinkedIn to reward us for all this effort.
I've been wondering why so many AI searches cite LinkedIn these days! I didn't realize this was a larger pattern. LinkedIn presence seems to be becoming a lot more important for discoverability. This is great advice.
Same. I’d seen the citations without really stopping to consider what that meant for everything we publish here. Then I started testing a few searches myself.
LinkedIn is now shaping how AI systems describe professionals, not just how people discover them
I think I’m going to keep testing this on myself. Ask the same questions every few months and see whether the answers change as I publish more.
Great tips thanks
Thanks Ivan. I’m experimenting with some of this myself now, so I’ll report back if anything interesting happens.
The shift from being found to being cited is the line worth keeping.
That distinction stuck with me too. Being found gets you into the answer. Being worth citing probably means you’ve actually left something useful behind.
wow..this is smthn worth paying attention to for all linkedin ppl!
It made me look at all those old posts rather differently 😅
Thanks for sharing 👍
LinkedIn content is increasingly becoming part of how professional credibility, expertise, and authority are interpreted by both people and AI systems.
It’s definitely made me look at my own back catalogue differently. Some of those old posts may have a much longer life than I gave them credit for.
I've also noticed LinkedIn posts and articles are getting indexed far more now, both by Google and by LLMs + a bunch of Google Images results now pull directly from LinkedIn posts. Very insightful read, thank you both!
I don’t do much “searching” with LLMs, but I did notice that every time ChatGPT goes to research something, the LinkedIn icon appears among the sources.
You are both experts!
Not enough people are talking about this. But we really are in the AI age. And that we should be searchable by AI and referencable (if that makes sense). Also how long should you be consistent enough so AI recognizes you in your field?
Searchable by AI makes complete sense to me. I’ve started occasionally asking ChatGPT what it knows about me just to see which bits of my work have actually made their way in.
Indeed. Curating a LinkedIn identity is also increasingly a consistent way to maintain your presence on a professional social media platform. AI citations are also increasingly becoming a way of signaling individual relevance, if you think about it.
That longer life is what interests me. I used to think mainly about who might see a post that week. AI search gives old posts another route back to people months later.
Absolutely, LinkedIn is no longer just a networking platform; it is becoming a reputation layer where consistent expertise signals shape how both people and AI perceive your authority.
The funny part is we’ve all been building this record without really knowing AI would end up reading it too.