© ROOT-NATION.com - Use of content is permitted with a backlink.
Researchers at Pangram, a company that develops a leading tool for recognizing generated text, have released a large-scale analysis of the volume of artificial content on social media. The results were extremely revealing, yet entirely realistic, given the rapid integration of modern technologies into everyday communication. The analysis demonstrates the staggering scale of digital assistant usage on popular media platforms.
The key finding from Pangram’s experts is that the system identifies 41% of long-form content on LinkedIn as being entirely AI-generated. As for short posts on the same platform, 30% of publications were flagged as AI-generated. It seems that LinkedIn is saturated with AI-generated content to a much greater extent than any other social media platform. The only exception might be Medium, if we classify it as a social network, but the news there is discouraging: 31% of the long-form articles you read there are entirely written by AI.
Read also: AERONAUT – everything that flies above the ground: aviation, UAVs and drones, rockets, and space
Analyzing the X platform, Pangram experts found that 29% of long-form posts are AI-generated, though a logical question arises: who actually reads these dubious, rambling posts? At the same time, analysts note that long-form articles on X can be considered even more saturated with artificial intelligence than posts on LinkedIn, when taking into account hybrid texts created collaboratively by humans and machines. The company claims that only 53.2% of long-form posts on X are identified as being written entirely by humans, so keep this in mind when you decide to read such content. As for standard short posts on X, only 9% of them are 100% AI-generated.
On Reddit, the share of long-form content fully generated by AI is 13%, while for short posts, this figure drops to 3%. According to Pangram’s data, only 10% of long-form posts on Substack are AI-generated. However, for some unknown reason, the percentage of short AI-generated content on this platform is higher, reaching 12%.
Pangram analysts gathered the data for their report using their own Chrome browser extension. This tool monitors content directly as users browse web pages and flags relevant texts as AI-generated when it detects signs of generation.
The New York Times recently published an analytical piece in which the author sought to determine whether LinkedIn is becoming more engaging. Of course, the article doesn’t provide a definitive answer, but LinkedIn has indeed begun to function more like other popular social networks in recent times. At the same time, the journalist raised an important question: Is it possible to remain authentic on LinkedIn when the platform’s primary purpose is career advancement? Given that the use of AI is rightly considered a form of inauthentic behavior, the authenticity of such sincerity is highly questionable.
Read also:
- New LinkedIn algorithms: The platform will punish users for using AI
- The hottest job of the year: LinkedIn has named the new king of the job market