LinkedIn is restructuring its feed to prioritise relevant comments and discussions, aiming to foster genuine engagement while tackling AI-generated spam and maintaining platform trustworthiness.
LinkedIn is adjusting its feed to push more conversation into the app by ranking comments according to their relevance to each member. The change means replies will be ordered using signals such as professional interests, connections and recent engagement, rather than appearing in a single undifferentiated stream. The company is also beginning to place more timely and relevant discussions directly into the feed, a move designed to make commenting a more visible part of the experience.
The update comes after LinkedIn said earlier this month that time spent in post comments rose 18% year on year in the second quarter, while overall content consumption increased 10%. Those figures suggest that users are spending more time reading and responding to professional discussion, and that comment threads are becoming a more important part of how the platform keeps people engaged.
But the growth in comment activity has also raised questions about authenticity. LinkedIn has been tightening its response to engagement pods and AI-generated spam, particularly in comment sections, as it tries to separate genuine professional interaction from automated or coordinated posting. AI-detection firm Pangram Labs said in an analysis of 57,000 public LinkedIn posts that 30% of comments posted on the platform between April and June were entirely AI-generated, a level that could distort the apparent rise in engagement.
The new ranking approach fits with LinkedIn’s wider effort to make its feed more personalised and more trustworthy. The company’s own guidance says it uses profile data, activity and content interactions to surface posts, jobs and features that are most relevant to each member. In practical terms, the latest changes suggest LinkedIn is trying to do two things at once: encourage richer discussion while limiting the low-quality or automated replies that can undermine it.
Disclaimer: This content is intended for informational purposes only. Readers are advised to exercise their own judgement, conduct due diligence, or consult a qualified expert before acting on any information provided.
