When you respond to someone’s LinkedIn post with “commenting for reach,” what are you really saying?
On social media platforms like LinkedIn, algorithms factor in a post’s number of comments (as well as other forms of engagement, such as likes and impressions) when deciding how widely to share it. Some users try to game the system and help others gain more exposure by simply writing in the comments section, “commenting for reach” or “commenting for better reach.”
It signals a savvy awareness of how the system works. Or at least that’s what some users think. Microsoft-owned LinkedIn, like other social networks, is secretive about how its algorithm works.
On LinkedIn, users focus on professional networking and career development, posting all manner of articles related to the workplace. A well-intentioned “commenting for reach” might appear below any of them.
But with the recent tech industry layoffs, posts about becoming abruptly unemployed—and being in the job market—have garnered considerable attention of late. “Commenting for reach” replies below such posts can look particularly tone-deaf.
Earlier his month, Fortune reported on LinkedIn users writing about their layoff heartbreak—and sometimes seeing their posts go viral—in marked contrast to the shame and secrecy that often surrounded layoffs in the past. Among them was Nikita Kulkarni, who late last year lost her job in content design at Instagram, owned by Meta. She noted in her post that she would “miss her teammates dearly,” and asked users to reach out if they knew of any suitable open positions.
While many comments came across as heartfelt commiseration, and some vouched for her skills, others simply stated, “commenting for better reach.”
It’s possible that such replies helped boost the post. But they risk sounding inauthentic, and not everyone is sold on the idea, among them LinkedIn users who spoke to the Wall Street Journal.
“‘Commenting for reach’ turns us all into dribbling robots at the feet of the algorithm,” Olivia Nelson, who works in Atlanta for the education technology company Screencastify, told the Journal. She added that introducing the job seeker to someone hiring would be more helpful.
Brian Collins, head of sales at a Chicago software firm, told the Journal that leaving “even an emoji is better. It means that you sat there and you reflected on the emotion that you felt when you read the post, you looked through a large set of emojis and found the right one.”
LinkedIn spokesperson Suzi Owens wrote to Fortune:
“If the goal is to help amplify someone’s message (for example to share with your network they’re open to work), rather than ‘commenting for reach’ we encourage reacting to the content (e.g. like, love) or resharing the post. Reposting, for example, will help ensure people who you are connected with and who follow you will see the original content. React (e.g. like, love, clap) also gives that feedback to the member and can show up in your network’s feeds.”
“Commenting is about sharing ideas, knowledge and perspectives that add to the conversation,” she added. “For example, this could be asking questions to the original poster, adding your insights/perspective (in this instance for example it could be advice for getting a job, or insights on who’s hiring), or sharing why this person might make a good employee (if they’ve shared they’re open to work). Similar to reactions, posts that you comment on can show up in your network’s feeds.”
LinkedIn isn’t the only platform with “commenting for reach” replies, but it does seem to be particularly known for them. As one Twitter user recently wrote in a reply, “Commenting for better reach. Could I be more LinkedIn-ish?”
This article has been updated with the response from LinkedIn.
Learn how to navigate and strengthen trust in your business with The Trust Factor, a weekly newsletter examining what leaders need to succeed. Sign up here.
