LinkedIn is expanding its crackdown on AI-generated spam comments, targeting the “Great point!” economy that has turned the platform into a wasteland of algorithmic engagement bait.
The platform began limiting the visibility of content deemed “generic or repetitive” earlier this year. Now it’s expanding the system to catch “low-effort” comments that may be AI-generated — including those posted using automation tools with “little or no human involvement,” as well as comments that “restate the original post without sharing anything new.”
In other words: LinkedIn is finally doing something about the fact that every post now garners dozens of comments that read like a GPT prompt went wrong.
🔍 THE BOTTOM LINE
LinkedIn’s AI spam crackdown addresses the platform’s most visible problem — but the deeper issue is that LinkedIn’s engagement mechanics incentivise this behaviour in the first place.
What’s actually changing
LinkedIn’s moderation system now targets two categories:
- Automated comments — posts made through third-party tools that spam the same engagement patterns across multiple posts
- Restatement comments — low-effort replies that essentially rephrase the original post without analysis or insight (“This is a really important point about how AI is changing the workplace”)
The system doesn’t just remove these comments — it limits their visibility, meaning the engagement-driven incentives that reward this behaviour are directly undermined.
The scale of the problem
If you’ve been on LinkedIn anytime in the last 12 months, you know exactly what this is about. Every post from a CEO, recruiter, or thought leader generates the same predictable pattern of responses:
- “Great insights, thanks for sharing!”
- “This is so important. [Restates original post]”
- “Couldn’t agree more. [Generic positive sentiment]”
A significant portion of these are AI-generated. Tools that auto-generate LinkedIn engagement are a cottage industry, promising to “build your personal brand” by having an algorithm write comments on other people’s posts. The result is a platform where genuine conversation is drowned out by algorithmic noise.
🗣️ Editorial Voice
Here’s the thing: LinkedIn’s spam problem is entirely self-inflicted. The platform’s algorithm rewards engagement above all else, so people optimise for engagement. The fact that the engagement is now AI-generated garbage is just the logical endpoint of a system that values activity over substance.
The crackdown is good. But if LinkedIn doesn’t also fix the incentive structure — if it still rewards volume over quality — the spam will just find a new form. It always does.
❓ Frequently Asked Questions
Q: Will this affect my LinkedIn comments if I’m human? Probably not, unless you habitually post generic restatements. The system targets automation and low-effort patterns.
Q: Does this affect NZ users? Yes, it’s a platform-wide change affecting all LinkedIn users globally.
Q: What about AI tools that help you write comments? If you’re using a tool to automate comments without reading or understanding the post, yes, this targets you. If you’re using AI to draft a comment that you then edit and personalise, you’re probably fine — but the line is blurry.
Q: What should professionals do instead? Write comments that add something. An original observation, a question, a counterpoint, a personal experience. The algorithm might hate it, but actual humans will appreciate it.
🔍 THE BOTTOM LINE
LinkedIn’s AI spam crackdown is overdue and welcome. But it’s treating a symptom, not the cause. As long as the platform rewards engagement volume over conversation quality, the spam economy will keep finding new ways through.
