Today’s front page of MARCA, Spain’s most-read sports newspaper, reports that Mbappé had a rough night and couldn’t make it to training.
These “news” pieces about the footballer are as frequent as the comments questioning their relevance.
A vicious cycle. These articles generate the most comments (and therefore traffic and engagement), but the comments -and the article – themselves add zero value.
From the media’s perspective, it’s crystal clear. Clicks rule everything. They’ll keep publishing whatever gets the most traction and views. Content quality? That’s secondary.
If, say, they published an in-depth tactical analysis of a team’s playstyle, almost no one would read it. That piece would get buried.
But, to some extent, that makes sense. People read sports news to unwind, to disconnect from daily life. If you want something serious, you go to real newspapers, right?
That said, I’m not here to talk about football. Lately, I’ve noticed this same trend creeping into so-called professional platforms like LinkedIn.
The formula for grabbing quick attention is everywhere. For example, posting about the heavy tax burden on freelancers is an instant success. It’s a topic that sparks emotions—reactions, comments, engagement.
And don’t get me wrong, I’m not here to criticize that type of content. I actually 100% agree with the argument. But for me, it doesn’t really add professional value. I scroll through my feed to learn about topics I don’t know or to gain fresh perspectives on familiar ones.
That kind of content is definitely less flashy, more subtle. From my own experience, when I’ve shared those deeper reflections, they don’t gain much traction. And it’s not about popularity—it’s about offering real value to the community, which is what truly matters.
Some might argue that we already have enough on our plates and don’t need our feeds to be too dense. Fair enough. But if there’s one thing we can’t complain about, it’s the endless places where we can consume light content.
I’ve always believed LinkedIn thrives partly because it’s the one social network you can have open at work without raising eyebrows. Your boss sees it, and it’s totally fine. Try saying the same about Meta’s platforms.
However, LinkedIn content is slowly starting to resemble those other networks more and more.
Just like with sports news, it’s a vicious cycle. The content that gains traction keeps getting published over and over again.
The issue? This loop is largely fueled by the algorithm, which doesn’t care about objective quality—just external engagement metrics.
And speaking of algorithms, there’s another hot topic I want to touch on: AI-driven job application processes.
More and more people are using AI tools to write or refine their résumés and cover letters. Nothing wrong with that—any tool that helps improve things is welcome.
The real issue is that our tech-savvy friends are optimizing for other silicon-based companions—ATS (Applicant Tracking Systems) that filter applications based on pre-set algorithms.
So what used to be a human process has now turned into a cyber ping-pong match.
To the point where cover letters have become completely soulless and indistinguishable. Ironically, those who still write real cover letters now have a much higher chance of standing out.
Sure, AI tools help eliminate major mistakes—which is why I’d recommend using them for a final check—but they should be working off your words, something genuine.
At the end of the day, motivations are human, not artificial. And no machine will ever understand them the way a person can. But what happens if interviews themselves start being conducted by machines?
We’re not here to reject technology—it’s what drives progress. But let’s be honest, some algorithms could use better optimization. We’ll get there.
In the meantime, if you want to talk to real people, in a 100% BS-free environment—this is your chance.
We’re waiting for you!
