2  Why LinkedIn?

Dan’s original book makes the case for why academics should use social media at all. The short version is that academia is not a meritocracy, good work does not automatically find its audience, and social media provides a way to share your work that does not depend on gatekeepers. If you want the full argument with evidence, read Chapter 1 of Twitter for Scientists.

This chapter is about the different question of why LinkedIn is a viable alternative (if not a true spiritual replacement) for Good Twitter.

2.1 The Post-Twitter World

For about a decade, Twitter was the main home of academic social media with people sharing papers, finding collaborators, and building genuine communities around shared interests (in addition to mixing in enough memes and shitposting to never take itself too seriously). It was chaotic, occasionally toxic, but undeniably useful and fun.

That era is over and changes to the platform since 2022 have driven many academics elsewhere, including LinkedIn, BlueSky, Mastodon and Threads. I have spent several years trying most of the alternatives and settled on LinkedIn - it’s nowhere near as fun or addictive as Old Twitter but it’s proven the best professional option for me, so this book tries to make the transition easier for others.

2.2 What LinkedIn Offers

A large, professionally-oriented user base. LinkedIn has over a billion members, with more than 50% holding a degree. Your potential audience includes academics, but also professionals in industry, policy, healthcare, education, and other sectors who might actually care about your work.

Stability. Unlike certain platforms that have been destroyed by erratic ownership, LinkedIn has remained relatively consistent. Your investment in building a presence is less likely to be wiped out by platform upheaval or the whims of a ketamine binge.

Professional context. LinkedIn’s culture is explicitly professional. This shapes expectations: users post under their real name and are linked to their workplace so bad behaviour and toxicity is much less common. Posts are generally taken seriously and people tend to be constructive rather than combative.

Academic discourse. LinkedIn does support genuine academic discussion. It is slower and less spontaneous than Twitter was, but substantive conversations happen. You can share papers, debate ideas, and engage with others’ work. The real-time back-and-forth that characterised Twitter doesn’t really happen, but substantive exchanges do.

Reach beyond academia. If your work has implications for practice, policy, or the public, LinkedIn connects you with people who might actually use it. Practitioners, policymakers, journalists, and industry professionals are all there.

2.3 What LinkedIn Does Not Offer

On the flip side:

Slower, less spontaneous interaction. The rapid-fire exchanges and viral/trending content that characterised academic Twitter do not really happen on LinkedIn. Conversations unfold over hours or days rather than minutes. This can be frustrating if you are used to real-time debate or enjoy a side order of chaos.

Algorithmic unpredictability. Like all platforms, LinkedIn uses algorithms to determine what appears in feeds. Industry analyses suggest organic reach has declined by approximately 50% in recent years, with engagement down around 25%. Your posts may not reach your followers reliably, and there is little transparency about why.

A corporate aesthetic. LinkedIn’s culture skews toward corporate professionalism. The performative positivity and motivational content can be grating. You will scroll past a lot of “I’m humbled to announce” posts.

2.4 Does Social Media Actually Help Academics?

There is peer-reviewed evidence that social media engagement is associated with academic outcomes, though the research has focused more on Twitter than LinkedIn specifically.

Klar and colleagues (2023) analysed 8,512 applied researchers in Germany and found that researchers’ popularity on social media correlated with both their visibility (measured by citations) and interconnectedness (measured by collaborations) in the publication domain. Importantly, they found that the relationship differed by platform: Twitter popularity was more strongly associated with citations from distinct authors, while LinkedIn followers had higher marginal effects on the number of distinct co-authors. The authors conclude that “social media platforms are a relevant channel of academic communication, alongside existing channels of formal and informal exchange.”

A 2014 Nature survey of over 3,500 researchers found that ResearchGate, LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter were the most visited platforms. The primary reason researchers maintained profiles was simply to be discoverable: “maintaining a profile in case someone wanted to get in touch.” After that, the most popular activities were posting content related to work, discovering peers, and tracking metrics. The survey is now over a decade old and the platforms have changed considerably since then (Twitter’s decline, LinkedIn’s growth, the emergence of Bluesky and Threads), but the basic motivations it identified, being findable and sharing work, remain relevant.

The evidence suggests social media is genuinely useful for academics, not just a distraction. But what you get out of it depends on what you want to achieve and which platform you use.

2.5 For Teaching-Focused Academics

Teaching innovations deserve audiences beyond your own institution. When you develop an effective assessment approach or create useful resources, others could benefit from knowing about it. LinkedIn provides a way to share this work with educators across institutions and sectors.

LinkedIn also connects you with people outside traditional academic networks, including learning technologists, educational developers, and trainers in professional contexts who are often working on the same problems you are.

To be clear, Twitter was also good for this. The educational community on academic Twitter was active and supportive but Dan’s original book did not explicitly focus on teaching, so this one does.

2.6 For Sharing Open Educational Resources

If you create open educational resources, LinkedIn offers a way to get them in front of people. OER repositories are important for hosting and findability, but they are largely passive. LinkedIn lets you actively push resources to people who might use them, explain the context, and invite feedback.

There is more on this in Chapter 4.