According to Forbes, LinkedIn hasn’t meaningfully evolved since Microsoft acquired it for $26.2 billion in 2016, despite having over one billion users and the internet’s cleanest identity graph of real professionals. The platform failed to capture the professional exodus from X/Twitter when that platform descended into chaos, watching as Threads, WhatsApp groups, and Slack absorbed the migration instead. Microsoft has invested over $13 billion in OpenAI since 2019 while aggressively modernizing every other product from Windows to Office, but LinkedIn remains the lone outlier. The company’s feed has drifted toward “hustle porn” and engagement-bait content that fuels user anxiety rather than professional value. LinkedIn’s spokesperson defended the platform’s AI investments in job search and profile tools while emphasizing its “trusted credibility” advantage.
The identity paradox
Here’s the thing about LinkedIn: they’re sitting on what should be the most valuable asset in professional tech. A verified identity graph with real employers, real skills, real career histories – it’s basically the foundation every AI company dreams about. But they treat authenticity like a security feature rather than an innovation engine. It’s like owning the world’s best ingredients but only making basic sandwiches.
And that’s the real tragedy. When X/Twitter went off the rails, this should have been LinkedIn’s moment to become the home for serious professional discourse. Founders, operators, researchers – they all needed a stable platform for real conversations. But LinkedIn didn’t build the tools, didn’t create the formats, didn’t do anything to welcome them. So everyone scattered to private groups and other platforms.
Microsoft’s AI blind spot
What’s truly baffling is Microsoft’s role in all this. They’re spending billions to become an AI superpower, rebuilding everything from 40-year-old Windows to GitHub. But LinkedIn? It’s like the forgotten stepchild. You’d think they’d be pouring AI resources into their professional network – it’s literally the perfect sandbox for work-related AI experiments.
I mean, think about it. LinkedIn has predictable behavior patterns, clear enterprise use cases, and deep HR integration. It should be leading Microsoft’s charge into the future of work. Instead, it feels like they’re just maintaining the asset rather than evolving it. How does that make any strategic sense?
The video disaster
Let’s talk about video, because this is where LinkedIn’s failure becomes almost comical. The platform “supports video” in the same way that a library “supports” shouting – technically possible, but completely missing the point. TikTok built discovery, YouTube built learning, Zoom built live events. LinkedIn? They treat video like an attachment you upload into the void.
There are no creator tools, no recommendation systems, no analytics worth mentioning. A video posted on LinkedIn is, as Forbes perfectly put it, “an act of hope, not distribution.” Professionals don’t go there for video because LinkedIn never built a world where video could actually thrive.
The great unbundling
While LinkedIn stood still, the entire professional media landscape reinvented itself around them. Newsletters took over expert publishing, communities like Circle and Geneva captured professional discourse, platforms like Maven and Teachable absorbed creator-led education. LinkedIn had a decade head start on all of them.
They had the audience, the credibility, the distribution. All they needed to do was build the platform. Instead, we got a feed dominated by cringe storytelling and ChatGPT-regurgitated advice. This wasn’t just a missed feature – it was a missed era. And if they don’t wake up soon, LinkedIn risks becoming the Facebook of the professional world: too big to ignore, but too irrelevant to lead.
