Hi Reader

Yesterday morning, I was in Birmingham for a catch up with Emma Johnson, a partner and patent attorney at Forresters. She was giving me a tour of their fabulous new offices.

(One of my favourite parts was the bookcase which featured books of cases and reports belonging to the founders Harold Forrester and Charles Ketley, as well as nods to technological developments like a stylish vintage lightbulb).

The office space also featured individual offices which can be booked by team members.

Before they were put to use, Emma imagined that the most popular offices would be the corner offices which have floor to ceiling windows overlooking the city.

But no, it’s actually a tucked-away internal office which is proving to be the favourite.

Time, people, and their actions have provided feedback.

Over the last few weeks it’s been interesting to see/hear how real life and human interactions have been stress testing AI tools…

THE FEEDBACK LOOP

In April, Claude Mythos Preview hit the headlines because of its capabilities in finding and exploiting software capabilities. This could have huge cyber security and societal implications if it fell into the hands of bad actors.

So, Anthropic has restricted public use and launched Project Glasswing, an initiative which brings together tech firms like Apple, Amazon Web Services, Nvidia, Google and others in an effort to secure the world’s most critical software.

Last month at BrightonSEO Conference there were (as you might expect) many talks about AI. One that stood out to me gave three reasons why there’s a growing backlash against AI generated content.

• Pattern fatigue - the LLMs like ChatGPT and Claude are trained on expert copywriting, but tend to use the same structure and templates over and over. AI likes systems and patterns. Humans like surprises and variation. Too much of the same, and it becomes white noise.
• Effort - if you can’t be bothered to write it, I can’t be bothered to read it
• Authenticity - if someone thinks AI has written your post, whose words and ideas are they? Am I really reading or hearing what you think?

This comes up in my conversations a lot recently. Someone said to me recently “I saw a post with an em dash so I stopped reading. I thought it must be AI.”

(This is a shame - I love a dash - 🙂 - 😀 - 😂)

And this feedback loop is changing how platforms operate.

A couple of days ago (20 May), Laura Lorenzetti,VP and Executive Editor, LinkedIn Global Editorial, posted an article about “Keeping Conversations Real on LinkedIn”.

They’re responding to the flood of AI generated content aka “AI slop”.

Laura said “It dilutes the valuable insights that real human conversations can spark”. They are taking steps to crack down on automation tools, dial back on generic content, and strengthen authenticity.

LinkedIn wants to prioritise content which has or adds a clear perspective, context or expertise. It’s not just posts either, it’s comments as well.

They’re also going to prioritise verified members, as a way to filter out the bots and spam. (So now I might actually have to verify my profile.)

The world is pretty overwhelming right now. AI. The War in Iran. Cost of Living.

It’s one of the reasons I haven’t emailed for a few weeks. I just didn’t want to write about AI.

But I like to cling onto hope, have faith in people’s ability to adapt, and keep persevering to see what’s needed and valued in these times.

That’s my feedback loop in motion.

How are things with you Reader?

Best,

Charlotte

P.S. LinkedIn is prioritising “clear perspective, context or expertise.” This is exactly what we work on in my messaging services: Clarify Before You Amplify. Finding your stories, clarifying your expertise, then amplifying it strategically. Not the other way around.

June bookings open. Hit reply.

NEXT WEEK: Mirror Mirror

REFLECTION TO TRY THIS WEEK: CLARITY BEFORE YOU AMPLIFY

LinkedIn wants content with “clear perspective, context or expertise.”

Here’s how to find yours:

Think of a recent example where your expertise showed up in action.

Answer these questions (by hand, voice note, however works):

1. How have you helped someone recently?
2. What was their specific problem?
3. What did you do that made a difference?
4. What feedback did they give you?

Don’t craft a post yet. Don’t worry about how it sounds.

Just capture the story. That’s the clarity.

Why this works:

You can’t amplify what you haven’t clarified.

AI can’t write your story if you don’t know what it is first.

This is what my messaging services are built on: clarify before you amplify.

The story is already there. You just need to find it.

HOW THE COVER WAS CREATED

This week’s cover plays with the concept of loops: circular, recurring, iterative.

Originally, the cover looked too much like me. It was unsettling. I learned I do not like photo-realism imagery.

So I decided to change direction and go for a Modern Illustrated Poster Style, inspired by The New Yorker and minimalist sci-fi posters.

The feedback loop in action: tried something, got uncomfortable feedback (from myself!), adjusted.

Now this one’s one of my favourites.