LinkedIn Engagement Pods... or are they 'communities'?

Hey listeners, Neal here from The Asylum.

Let me ask you this—have you ever been drawn into a seemingly prestigious LinkedIn community, only to find it's nothing more than a smoke-and-mirrors show?

On this episode, we pull back the curtain on LinkedIn engagement pods.

These elusive, often misunderstood groups promise skyrocketing engagement rates and viral success, but is it all just a facade?

By the end of this episode, you'll know what these pods are, how they operate, and why joining one might be the worst decision for your LinkedIn strategy.

We’re diving deep with Katie McManus, a business strategist, LinkedIn Company Pages expert Michelle J Raymond, Espresso founder John Espirian, Fred Copestake, Tracy Bedwell, Philip Charter, and Paul Smart joining us too.

We'll discuss why engagement pods give off an illusion of success and what they'll actually do for your engagement.

More importantly, you'll gain invaluable insights into recognising these pods and understanding why they're tolerated on LinkedIn.

If you're serious about building genuine relationships and authentic engagement on LinkedIn, this episode is a must listen.

You'll gain the knowledge to spot fake engagement tactics, understand the reasoning behind LinkedIn's tolerance for these pods, and learn simple yet effective ways to foster real, meaningful interactions.

By integrating these insights into your LinkedIn strategy, you'll not only dodge the pitfalls of artificial engagement but also stand out with authenticity and integrity in a world of shortcuts and quick fixes.

Follow Daniel Hall - pod insider with Spot-a-Pod: https://www.linkedin.com/in/danielbhall

Timestamped Summary

00:00:00 - Introduction

Neal introduces the concept of LinkedIn engagement pods and why they’re misleading.

00:00:17 - Welcome and Guest Introduction

Katie McManus welcomes the audience and sets the stage for a candid discussion about LinkedIn engagement pods.

00:01:21 - What is an Engagement Pod?

Neal and Katie explain what engagement pods are and how they operate.

00:04:16 - The Downsides of Engagement Pods

Neal discusses the negative aspects, emphasizing how fake comments and likes dilute real engagement.

00:05:25 - Why Aren't They Banned?

Fred Copestake and John Aspirian weigh in on why LinkedIn tolerates these pods despite their questionable ethics.

00:09:44 - LinkedIn's Dilemma

Michelle J. Raymond and Philip Charter talk about LinkedIn’s possible motivations for allowing engagement pods.

00:13:05 - Expert Opinions:

Various experts share their views on the artificiality of these pods and what genuine engagement looks like.

00:18:24 - How to Spot a Pod Person

Neal gives practical tips on recognizing members of engagement pods.

00:21:21 - Wrap-Up and Final Thoughts

Neal summarizes key takeaways and encourages listeners to focus on genuine engagement.

Have you been invited to join a community which doesn't seem to have any central purpose and is full of people that seem to be famous?

I got bad news for you.

Don't join until you've listened to this episode.

Welcome to the asylum.

LinkedIn will not like this podcast, but you will love it.

Behave, LinkedIn lunatics.

We have visitors.

Ah, LinkedIn engagement pods.

The sophisticated equivalent of paying your friends to laugh at your jokes.

It's time we unveil this relatively badly kept secret around what some people think is the golden ticket to reach an engagement on LinkedIn.

They think it's the fast track to influencer success.

But spoiler alert, it's just snake oil with really fancy packaging.

You write a post on LinkedIn and it falls completely flat.

No attention, no likes, no comments.

Can be quite deflating when you start out on LinkedIn.

And that's why it's no surprise that some people attempted to join what we call engagement pods.

This is Katie McManus, business strategist.

An engagement pod is basically, we're in a group together, there are a hundred of us.

I might write a post and then I'm dropping the link to my post in whatever chat format we have, and everyone is going and commenting on it as soon as they possibly can, saying, great post, love this, thanks for sharing, blah, blah, blah.

It's hard for an algorithm to identify that and think, oh, cool, like, this is fake, this is fake engagement.

We should shut this down because it looks a lot like real engagement.

And that's one of the reasons why these pods get away with it.

And I think it's even harder now with AI because people can just have AI kind of like preemptively write something for them in response to the post, and then it looks more like it was actual engagement.

Right?

Because it's not just great post, it's not just, you know, love this point, thanks for sharing.

It's, you know, oh, you know, I love your point about this, this and this.

And, you know, you should also think about this thing and blah, blah, blah.

And remember, the social media platforms, their goal is not that we have an authentic experience.

Their goal is that we stay on the platform for as long as possible.

And guess what, everyone who's in that pod, the more time they spend hopping on links and going into comment section saying, great post, great share, thanks for sharing this.

They're there and they're perceiving all the advertising that the social media platform is selling.

I think we have to reset our expectations around what is the end goal of the social media platform and like, what would be their motivation to fix this versus what our motivation to fix this would be?

They're very, very different things.

Now these are relatively private communities which you agree to join in return for indulging in sharing other people's posts, liking and commenting in return for some of those people liking and commenting and sharing yours.

At least in theory that's how it's supposed to work.

But invariably there are always going to be winners and there are always going to be losers.

And if you're an unknown, you're likely to be one of those losers loser.

So say you join one of these pods and you make a post and you're not a loser and some of the participants actually join in and comment on your post.

What you can look forward to is a sea of terrible, meaningless, low value comments like great post, thanks for sharing, agree.

Or in some cases even worse, they haven't even bothered themselves.

They've got their AI automation tool to do it and what they've done is they've essentially taken your own post and reworded it in a slightly different order.

So it sounds like their words, but they look eerily familiar.

Now let's talk about why joining an engagement pod is not the winning strategy that some people think and some others suggest it might be.

Sure, it might give you a little initial burst of a dopamine hit when you get those likes and comments and it's 10 times what you used to.

Here's the thing, you're living a lie.

It's like going on to a stage and getting cheered by a crowd of people that have zero interest in you.

They've just been told to clap you and cheer you and the idea is that you're left looking to the outside world like you've been way more successful with your moment under the spotlight than you actually were.

No one cares, not really.

You've just basically had the equivalent of a crowd that had been paid to turn up and pretend to be interested in you.

How deflating do you think that feels once the initial dopamine wears off?

And for sure I can understand your question.

Why would LinkedIn allow them to happen?

Sales trainer Fred Copes Did Microsoft own some of the pod technology?

Are they looking at it going that there's a ton of people who are on the platform using it in inverted commas?

Do they feel making a better experience because there is activity going on and it looks like a dynamic and interesting place, like a nightclub full of hired actors or something?

I don't know.

It's.

Yeah, it doesn't really make any sense, to be honest, because I was explaining these to a mate in the gym the other day because I'm a bit sad.

That's what we were talking about.

And this guy's intelligent, okay?

So he's an IT director, he's an svp.

And I was talking about this because I don't even know what they are.

And I said, oh, well, it's like people sort of say stuff, but they plug into these things, other people are going to comment on them.

And he just said, well, that's bollocks, isn't it?

He said, that's all fake.

Surely that doesn't do anybody any good and it'll just drive everybody away.

I went, well, yeah, mate, yes, that's the point.

Which is why it doesn't really make any sense that seemingly clever people are letting that it happen.

So how do we stand out if, as Fred suggests, even clever people can't tell the difference between us and a bot?

Bad actor community membership expert John Aspirian.

It's a tough gig that.

Because the public signs of engagement matter to some people.

It's almost like you're getting reviews, lots and lots of good reviews, because, look, this person's content gets 200 odd comments every time he posts.

But actually, if only you knew that 190 of those comments are robots or, you know, because of some engagement pod.

If you knew the reality, you would know that person wasn't worth bothering with.

But it's very hard to tease that out.

And we're all time poor, aren't we?

You know, you look at stuff for a few seconds and then maybe get a vibe that that person must know what he's talking about because look at all the support that he's getting.

So it's hard.

How do you compete against that?

I don't know.

I mean, you keep your moral compass where it is.

You hope that you encounter people who value ethics and who actually go on real reputation.

If they can speak to a real person, who said, yeah, Niels actually knows what he's doing, he's not going to mess you around.

That counts for more than, you know, public numbers, I think, is getting real recommendations.

If there were a magic bullet to somehow weed out all of those bad actors, then obviously we'd fire that gun, wouldn't we?

I mean, technically speaking, it does go against LinkedIn's rules.

Their professional community policies say you must not engage in acts that would unfairly game LinkedIn's algorithms.

But we know that people don't always follow the rules, they just want shortcuts.

I suppose when you're in the industry of, let's say, in LinkedIn training, the real good guys and girls know who the other real good guys and girls are.

So the frustration is, how do you convey that to the outside world?

I don't really have a good answer for you, Neil, but I do know that if you ever find yourself in front of one of those good guys and girls, they will happily make recommendations for others.

We've got a really collegiate community.

People will refer work around, so it's great you find one good person, then you're okay.

But so many people have been burned by going to the wrong person because that person has got a big following.

But it's incumbent on the networks themselves because they must know that this bad practice happens.

It's a sad state of affairs where there's a conflict of interests going on, because I think the networks will be aware that, yes, there's some bad practice happening, but some of that attends their business goals.

Like if there are superstars on a platform who get massive numbers, well, maybe that will attract more people to try the platform.

Ergo, they can sell more premium memberships or more ads and so forth.

So it's a slightly uncomfortable alliance between some of the bad actors and the platform because they, the platform will know that at the end of the day, it might end up earning them some more money.

And I think that's completely unethical, but I'm not in the hot seat, unfortunately.

So we've established that they're probably not the best idea.

We've established that even clever people aren't really figuring out the system and how to differentiate between bots and real people.

It's clearly a problem.

So really, Honestly, why do LinkedIn not ban them?

And a few people think they understand why that might be.

Michelle J.

Raymond is a company pages expert.

They've got to show advertisers that it's a popular platform, that the engagement is there, that people are on the platform hanging out.

And so if they were to come back and cut those numbers down by, I reckon it's got to go down by 30% at least by this artificially inflated numbers.

And you might think that they're a little bit higher, but if they were to then go back and go, oh, sorry, you know how you pay a premium to run ads on our platform because of these high numbers?

Well, you know, we're going to drop those by 30%.

So it's not really as cool as what we made out it was going to be, then I think that they would have a lot of explaining to do.

And that has a dollar figure attached to it.

And so if I was cynical, I would say that that's the reason.

But I also think if I was to, you know, flip it around and go, okay, let's say it's not the dollars, let's say it's not related to that.

I actually think that the people who run LinkedIn are so out of touch with the everyday user experience of the platform.

I don't think that they realize how much this stuff is going on.

And, you know, that's the thing that I worry about the most.

You know, there will always be people trying to game the system ever since the beginning of time that, you know, you see it in sport, you see it in everyday life, people trying to cheat on tests and all this.

So let's just say human nature.

There's always going to be the people that are following the rules and those trying to go around it.

But I just don't think LinkedIn people that design these things use the platform enough to actually understand, you know, and the ones at the top who might be, they live in this little, you know, fairy tale castle up on the hill, and they just think LinkedIn runs in a particular way and that is not the experience of the everyday user.

And so from my perspective, I'd probably go, it's more that than what it is on the other side with the ads.

And why do I say that?

Because I've had so many conversations with the people in the pages product development team, behind the scenes when they come to me and they want my advice on new features and functions.

And I've even had an audience with all of the LinkedIn company page engineers.

There was a team of eight of them and their manager in the room.

And I had to explain to them the day in the life of a company page admin and what the challenges were.

And I saw a whole room full of people almost with jaws on the ground going, oh, my God, what?

Really?

They think that.

And so they don't have that connection with their customer, you know, and I hear the term like customer advisory board.

I think LinkedIn would go a long way to putting one of those in.

And they used to do it pretty well, but I feel like they've, you know, kind of drifted off course, which, you know, I can understand how that happens, but they don't know their customers well enough.

I think it's that simple.

This is copywriting coach Philip Charter.

I think generally they just don't give a shit because LinkedIn are in it for to make money and to sort of sell the future of their data and their platform.

So if they're so into AI that they're ramming it down your throat and scraping your content without your opt in, if you're not in Europe, why would they care about an engagement pod?

I mean, it's maddening to those of us who are trying to do things in a genuine way, but I can understand why the bigwigs at LinkedIn don't care so much.

I mean, a good way to get engagement as well is to criticize LinkedIn.

I mean, that's always of win win.

Like if you just say something bad about the very place where everyone is and you're like, oh, why do you think that?

Oh, that's, that's strange.

That's funny.

Business.

Big brother Paul Smart.

As long as people are on the platform and they're engaging and even my music feds do do it for them, it's loads of people on LinkedIn talking to loads of other people on LinkedIn and it makes it look lively and interesting.

They must hate the fact that their algorithm tells them to promote my posts on Fridays because of all those external links, but it is also hundreds of people on their platform talking to each other.

So it's kind of a rock and a hard place for them.

It's like, well, I don't really want people to see this because I might go to YouTube.

They will go to YouTube.

So if you've got people like Luke Matthews saying, this is how you use LinkedIn, all you need to do is continually be promoting me and what I do on LinkedIn and in return, I'll promote you and what you do on LinkedIn.

And all these people are going to go ahead and Buy Premium and LinkedIn are like, I don't care if nobody does any business with other people.

I'm making millions.

Now.

Full disclosure, I'm not actually in any pods myself.

I never have been.

I looked into them a few years ago because I was curious as to what they were.

Especially when somebody named Chris, who was quite well known a few years ago, certainly during the COVID era, for doing anti engagement pod parody videos, believe it or not, invited me into one.

I had no idea what they were.

And the moment I found out more, I felt physically sick.

I was told if I joined this pod, which was organized through WhatsApp, I would have to contribute at least one comment every single hour to several posts within this community.

When I tell you there were 25 members, that will give you an idea of just how busy I would have been.

And this was a small group.

Certainly the higher up ones, the elite ones, where you'll find the majority of Your A list LinkedIn influencers like Justin Welsh and Luke Matthews and Alex B.

Sheridan and Chris Du and.

Well, I'm not going to name any other names because now we're going to be veering into some people that I actually consider friends, even though I don't agree with their practices.

And believe me, the louder they shout I'm not in an engagement pod, the more likely they are actually in one.

People that aren't in engagement pods don't really need to say anything.

They don't have to defend themselves because you'll never catch them in one.

So how do you spot a pod person?

It's pretty easy.

Sales trainer Tracy Bedwell.

I think a lot of the big ones, as we know, do have engagement pods and it's disappointing.

Very disappointing.

It's very unusual for somebody when they put a post up to have 2,000 likes and, you know, 800 comments and 300 reshares.

If anyone's doing that without a pod, they're in the 1%.

I would say I have connections and I have certain connections who will always comment on my posts.

And it's not because I'm asking them to, it's just because there tends to be maybe a group of about 20 or 30 people who generally every week will like or comment on my posts.

But those 30 people change over time.

You know, it might be 30 people for a couple of months and then one or two drops off and another two pop on from somewhere.

And I feel like we're probably the same.

There's some people who pop up in your feed and you quite like their content or you quite like them.

So you will always try and pop a little like or pop a little comment on their posts.

But can you have like an organized group without.

I don't think so, no.

I think an organized group is a pod.

If you want to hear from the horse's mouth of someone that's actually in engagement pods ethically, kind of think about it like an ethical hacker.

He's in engagement pods to expose them.

You want to go and check out my friend Daniel Hall.

It's very difficult to find him on LinkedIn, so I'll also put a link to his LinkedIn profile in the description.

So if you're listening to this in Apple podcasts or Spotify or any of the other main platforms.

Scroll down to the description area and you'll find the link there.

How to spot a pod.

Look for the same 200 people, all commenting and complimenting each other's wisdom.

Day in, day out, they're there without fail.

They have to be.

It's part of their contractual obligation.

When the comments are as predictable as your uncle's drinking habits at a Christmas party.

Always the same level of enthusiasm from participants, always just about enough relevance to not seem too obvious.

And certainly the same kind of people making the same kind of comments every day.

You're likely looking at a pod.

Remember, genuine engagement is usually varied, some good, some bad.

I have lots of friends on LinkedIn connections, followers who don't always agree with what I say, and they make that known.

And I love that about them.

I love that they feel empowered to say to me, neil, you're talking bollocks.

So if the comments are mostly agreeable day in, day out, the chances are they have to be there.

They're expected.

The switch has been flipped.

And for me, like, integrity is a huge thing.

And if someone is online saying that they have grown, they're.

They're following organically, and it's always been that way.

And, and look at me.

I'm so perfect and I can teach you this, this and this.

And it gets revealed later that they were being dishonest.

That switch gets flipped for me real fast, you know, depending on whether they're being predatory with their business.

Like, if they're really going after vulnerable people, people and trying to get their money and doing it on a falsehood, I will call them out and I won't be shy about that.

You know, if they're more benign, I'll probably just stop commenting on their content and.

Because I don't want their content showing up more to me.

Because if I'm commenting on their content and they happen to comment on mine, guess what?

My content's now getting pushed to a bunch of people in a pod.

And those people are never going to buy from you.

They're all just so desperate for followers, like, they're not on there to find an actual solution to their problems.

Right?

They've been sold on the Kool Aid.

That just isn't going to get them anywhere.

So where does this leave us?

Well, look, this is a massive topic and we will be revisiting engagement pods in full in plenty of episodes of the Asylum to come.

But for now, I will say this.

Engagement pods might seem like an easy shortcut and a real good source of dopamine to get you through your day.

But in reality, they're a dead end street leading to nowhere worthwhile.

And in fact, they could destroy your reputation if you're using engagement pods to lift your business.

Sure, you can game the system for a little while, but the truth always comes out.

And when it does, it won't be pretty.

Especially if Daniel Hall's on your case.

Instead of relying on fake interactions to build your presence, focus on genuine content, real conversations, and authentic connections.

It might take you longer, but the trust and respect that you'll earn will be real.

And that's worth a million times more than a couple of empty, vacuous Great post comments from an engagement pod.

Keep your integrity intact and remember, real engagement beats, fake claps and hearts every single time.

If you've enjoyed this episode, please do follow it in your favorite podcast app, WeLoveApple Podcasts and Spotify and drop me a review.

Let me know what you think of this show.

Visiting hours are over.

Do come back to the Asylum soon.

Goodbye.

Watch your back and we'll talk to you soon on another episode of the Asylum.