How to Write a Viral Article on LinkedIn

I would like to be able to start this article by giving the impression that I had a plan, I executed the plan, and the result was fame (or infamy, depending on your point of view).  Alas, I cannot.  I got lucky and I think I have figured out what I, albeit unintentionally, did right.

On August 12 I wrote what I thought was an innocent post.  My target audience was women who were having difficulty getting job offers.  Based on a few examples, I wrote the article telling women that some of their gender, who were wearing large engagement rings, were not getting job offers until they removed them.  Interviewers see everything.  Some care about somethings, some don't.  Even though they have accused me of it, I never said, for example, that I judge a woman based on her jewelry.  I don't.  The advice was simple and straightforward.  At least it was meant to be.  Who knew this would be controversial?  Not I!

Hundreds read the post.  Then thousands.  And reading some of the comments - after a while there were just too many - I began to think that maybe people were not reading the article I had written.  So I wrote a follow-up piece.  That too took off, albeit to a lesser extent.  In any event, the first went viral.

(I am not defining "viral" because I think it is subjective.  And what does it matter if 100,000 people read a post if the writer gets no business?  No business from 100,000 reads, lots of business from 100.  Which is viral?  It's like profile views.)

I have had articles read thousands of times, one on the implications of business owners using a Gmail account, even broke the 10,000 mark, and one about the importance of picking the right profile photo on LinkedIn has almost reached that benchmark.  On the other hand, what I consider to be an important post, on the importance of hiring veterans, nurses and the developmentally disabled, has yet to break the 100 reads mark.  Go figure.

As a recovering academic, I have been contemplating why an article on engagement rings took off, but one on veterans, nurses and the disabled, did not.  And I think I have the answer:

Choosing the Right Title

This one I did do intentionally.  I chose something that would be intriguing.  "Lose the ring!"  If the title had been, "Remember, recruiters look at you during interviews," it is doubtful anyone would have read it.  It certainly would not have gone viral!  Then again, who knows?

Readers

In the article I was writing about women with large engagement rings.  I used the Hope Diamond as the example.  I did not realize that for women the size of the diamond/stone does not matter.  Apparently, for them, all of their engagement rings display Hope Diamonds.  More importantly, and I hope I am wrong because this would be very sad, apparently many women self-identify by their engagement rings.  They are what they wear.

So advising that they may want to consider removing their engagement rings was tantamount to telling them, in their minds, to hide the fact that they are married (I never said anything about removing wedding rings) or have children (I never mentioned children). 

While it was not my intent, in some twisted way they thought I was attacking them as persons.  If anything, I was attacking interviewers.

Which brings me to the next cohort of readers: people in the staffing and recruiting industry.

I have 30,000 first-degree connections.  Not a single one is in the "staffing and recruiting" industry.  My purpose on LinkedIn is to get business and to help job seekers.  I have no need for staffing and recruiting professionals.  They are not my target audience.

When they read the article they were not offended personally but rather professionally.  Apparently they did not want the world to know that when conducting an interview with a job applicant they actually look at the job applicant.  They see what they are wearing and draw conclusions based on what they see.  Ooops!  (For the record, they also listen and draw conclusions based on what they hear!)

So the first thing is to choose a provocative title for the article and then a subject that will be of interest to more than one cohort.  In this case, women, engaged women, and recruiters/employers.

(I should add, more as an aside than anything else, that when you write a post on LinkedIn it is important to (a) choose relevant tags and (b) to send a tweet about the article including the phrase "tip@LinkedInpulse," so that LinkedIn can decide how and if to promote it.)

Commenting

You don't just want people to read the article, you want them to become engaged (no pun intended).  Because I hit a nerve, they became engaged.  As you can see from the photo at the top of this post, over 1,200 people have liked the article and over 800 commented on it.  Clearly it resonated with a lot of people. 

So the third thing you have to do is to write in such a way that your advice will be meaningful.  I believe sincerity is the key.  Be genuine.

Sharing

This brings me to the final component: sharing.  As you can see from the above photo, the article has been shared 259 times.  I assume that it was shared by people who liked it and by those who hated it.  The minute they shared it, they expanded the reach of the article.  That is why it went viral.

Of course, there is no way to know who has a large network and who doesn't.  And it really does not matter.  It's quality, not quantity.  All it takes is one well-connected individual, let's say someone connected to a reporter, and then the flower begins to bloom. (This is especially true if the article expands to additional sites, such as Twitter.)

Be Careful What You Wish For...

If I had known when I published the first article, what I know now, the only thing I would have done differently would have been to write the two articles as one.  I was honest.  I have the courage of my convictions.  I take nothing back.  And perhaps, as noted, that is also a requirement for going viral: sincerity.

In any case, the end result was good and bad press coverage, well over 450 new followers on LinkedIn, hundreds of reads of my other articles on LinkedIn, and not losing any first-degree connections.  (Just to clarify because no doubt someone will write that they dumped me, I lose one or two every day.  Right now I have over 40 invitations waiting.  In the past week, I have continued to lose one or two a day.  No change.  I will choose some of the 40 as replacements.) You can see for yourself, 10 percent of all readers "liked" the article.  I also have had hundreds of new views of my videos, specifically the one on branding, and at least one woman came to a talk I gave at the New York Public Library specifically because she read about this on Vogue.com.  (If you watch the videos, you'll see that we had a good chuckle about it.)   Within my network, I rose from #30-something to #7 in views.  And, since the article was published, traffic to my website is up four-fold.

Again, as noted, views really don't mean anything, but it is interesting.

Be Prepared for the Haters

Of course, hundreds of people wrote some very not nice things about me.  I'm a big boy; I can take it!  In any event, when they attacked me using profanity and insult, that said more about themselves than me.  The way you behave on-line says a great deal about you as a person and, as I have written previously, employers and recruiters may take public behavior into account when considering candidates. 

The article was picked up by the world press - proof that it is the quality of the network that matters, not the size.  (I think it began with the article on Vogue.com.  From there it spread.)   Google "Bruce Hurwitz" for the period of August 12 to 22nd and see for yourself.  Look closely and you will notice that some of the articles are identical.  That's what happens when a freelance journalist, who works for multiple sites, writes an article.  They are the mother lode.

One commentator is, in my opinion, a disgrace to her profession.

Bianca London wrote an attack piece.  That's fine.  That's her right.  I know that in the UK, where she is based, they have freedom of speech.  She highlighted the negative comments but could not have been bothered sharing any of the positive - or even mentioning the number of "likes" the posts received.  I now share with you the very first comment on the post:

It would have been easy to find.  She could have done it, but chose not to.  But that's fine.  What I object to is the last sentence of her article:

Well, I don't know what they wrote to LinkedIn, but this is what she wrote to me:

One would think that "awaiting comment" would mean a response to a substantive question.  Would you care to comment on...?  How do you respond to...?  Nope.  Not Bianca.  She just wanted me to comment on using my photo.

How did I respond?

(OK, I am not thanking her, but I am sharing it!  And since I have already been accused of ridiculous things, the gap between the two sections is not because I have edited something out, but rather because the screen shot would have been too small to easily read!)

Now don't draw any conclusions about journalistic ethics based on Bianca.  Base them on Marianne Garvey, my lady in shining armor who came to my defense.  This took guts.

As I wrote to Bianca, some women, who contacted me privately, said they were afraid to do so publicly.  But let me acknowledge a few of the brave souls who did - men and women:

(I just noticed that two of the above are from "Horowitz"es.  Different spelling; no relation.)

T
All of the above were, obviously, posted and in public view.  That is why I have not removed the names of the individuals.  The following two messages were sent to me privately.  I have removed the names of the senders for that reason.  (The remaining ones were too personal.  Removing identifying information would make them look like a redacted government document.)  But I think it is important for their voices to be heard:

My point in sharing these is to end on a positive message:  Stick to your beliefs; people will respect you and offer support.   Don't be afraid to post.  Yes, your views will be twisted. But that is the price you have to pay when you go public.  In the end, it will be worth it.  So again, don't be afraid to post!

UPDATE:  Here is an article written by Samantha Cooney for TIME.  Compare her behavior to that of Bianca London!

And I was actually invited to be on HLN.  While I would have liked to have discussed the important issues surrounding conducting a successful job search, I am appreciative of the opportunity.  Just click on the photo to play.

Then I made it to Fox:

And if you are having a bad day, maybe the Italians will set the record straight for you.

--------------------------------

Bruce Hurwitz is an executive recruiter, career counselor and business advisor.  In addition to serving on the Board of Directors of the Manhattan Chamber of Commerce, he chairs their Entrepreneurs Network, hosts their weekly podcast – The Voice of Manhattan Business – and serves as an Ambassador.  Visit the homepage of his website, www.hsstaffing.com, to read about the latest questionable offerings of so-called job search assistance companies.

Sadly, I have reached the maximum number of first-degree connections on LinkedIn.  This means we cannot connect.  The alternative is for you to “follow” me.

Have job search questions?  Send them to me and I'll try to answer them in 20-seconds.