Ah, LinkedIn, the one social platform where everyone pretends to be deeply professional but somehow spends all day posting inspirational quotes and humblebrags. And now, it’s back in the spotlight for something a little spicier than résumé updates: alleged gender bias in how the algorithm delivers post reach.
Yes, apparently some clever LinkedIn users decided to run their own undercover sting operation, CSI: Corporate Edition. Women reportedly swapped their profile photos and names to male ones, posted the exact same content, and watched their reach skyrocket, sometimes by 700%. That’s not an A/B test. That’s an A/B slap in the face.
So naturally, everyone asked the obvious question: Is LinkedIn’s algorithm quietly boosting men and ghosting women?
LinkedIn, to its credit, immediately put out a statement insisting their algorithm is a pure, innocent baby angel incapable of discrimination. Sakshi Jain, who seems to have drawn the short straw in the “please clean up this PR mess” meeting, clarified: “Our algorithm and AI systems do not use demographic information (such as age, race, or gender) as a signal.”
It’s basically saying, if sexism is happening, it’s definitely not us. It might be you. Or society. Or the moon. But definitely not our code.
LinkedIn says they tested several of these viral “I posted as a man and the algorithm treated me like royalty” examples and found nothing tied to gender. Apparently, impressions differ “for many reasons,” such as timing, competition for attention, and possibly the alignment of Mercury.
Jain further explained that a “side-by-side snapshot” of two posts isn’t enough to prove unfair treatment. In other words: “Just because your male clone did better than your actual self doesn’t mean it’s sexism. Calm down.”
LinkedIn also mentioned that content creation on the platform has skyrocketed in the past year. In other words, there are simply too many people posting too many things, and the algorithm is overwhelmed, like a tired middle manager skimming 1,000 emails and replying to none.
But according to LinkedIn, gender is absolutely not a factor. Not at all. Never. Don’t even think about it.
There is another possibility that LinkedIn delicately tap-danced around: People might just engage more with posts that look like they’re written by men.
Shocking.Life-changing. In no way connected to the history of planet Earth.
Some users changed only their listed gender, no photo, no name, and still saw better reach. That complicates things, unless LinkedIn’s users are now psychic or the algorithm is secretly reading vibes.
So is it the platform? Is it the users? Is it just the algorithm doing algorithm things? Yes. No. Maybe. Pick your favorite.
Jain also calmly mentioned that LinkedIn conducts internal tests to ensure no group is “systematically ranked lower,” and checks whether feed quality differs between men and women. Which is great, except…Why are you running gender-specific quality tests if gender has absolutely nothing to do with reach? Hmm. Curious.
This doesn’t mean LinkedIn is manipulating anything, but it does suggest that the platform has the capability to change reach by demographic if it ever wanted to. Love that for us.
LinkedIn insists there is no gender bias in its algorithm. Absolutely none. Zero. They pinky- promise. And to be fair, they also spend a lot of time telling the world how committed they are to equal opportunity, empowerment, and whatever other corporate slogans make people feel inspired.
But users aren’t convinced, and honestly, who can blame them? When someone posts as a man and suddenly gets 700% more visibility, it raises eyebrows, questions, and a few sarcastic memes.
Will more users test it? Absolutely. Will LinkedIn keep insisting it’s not them? Also yes. Will this get messy? Oh, very likely.
Until then, feel free to post whatever you want. Just don’t be surprised if your male alter ego goes viral before you do.
