LinkedIn has become the default stage for professionals to exchange knowledge, share insights, and showcase expertise. The platform rewards visibility, which in turn rewards content. But the race for visibility has also created a predictable side effect: an increase in copied, repackaged, or outright stolen content.
This is not about people writing similar ideas or discussing the same topics. That is normal.
This is about individuals copying existing posts verbatim and presenting them as their own.
The difference is not subtle, and the consequences are not trivial.
The Trigger: Identical Posts Presented as Original Work#
The catalyst for this article was simple. I encountered two posts in my feed from two unrelated individuals, published only hours apart. Both posts used the exact same graphic, the same text, the same structure, and the same messaging down to the last comma.
No attribution. No reference. No context. No acknowledgment of the original source.
It was a copy-and-paste job presented as original thought. This was neither a misunderstanding nor an accidental overlap. It was deliberate replication without credit.
The troubling part is not that two people did it. The troubling part is how common this type of duplication has become. It is no longer rare to see content reappear, cloned by multiple accounts, all claiming authorship.
Inspiration Is Normal, Copying Is Not#
Using other people’s work as a source of inspiration is normal. It is part of how ideas evolve.
I regularly read posts, examine diagrams, and explore explanations shared by others. Sometimes those spark new insights or help me articulate something differently. But inspiration and theft are not the same.
Here is what I do not do:
- I never copy someone’s content verbatim.
- I never reproduce their text or diagrams without acknowledgment.
- I never publish someone else’s work as my own.
What I do instead:
- I write my own narrative or perspective.
- I reshape the concept into something that reflects my experience.
- I credit the original creator when their work directly informs mine.
- I repost when the intent is to amplify the original message, not repurpose it.
Professionalism in a knowledge-driven environment requires transparency.
There is no valid excuse for circumventing it.
The Real Damage: Eroding Trust and Diluting Expertise#
Some argue that “it’s just LinkedIn content,” as if that makes professional misconduct acceptable. It does not. If anything, the casual acceptance of copying is a sign of a deeper issue.
Content theft creates several problems:
It devalues original work.
Thoughtful posts take time, and reducing them to copy-paste commodities discourages genuine creators.It erodes professional trust.
Professionals rely on credibility. Reposting content as your own is a direct violation of that trust.It weakens the signal-to-noise ratio.
When copied content circulates across multiple accounts, the platform becomes saturated with duplicates. This makes it harder to identify original voices.It inflates the perceived expertise of people who have not done the work.
Copying content can artificially boost someone’s visibility, leading audiences to believe they have knowledge they did not earn.It undermines the very idea of thought leadership.
True expertise requires originality and perspective, not duplication.
LinkedIn is not just a feed. It is a representation of professional identity.
Copying someone else’s work is not only unprofessional. It is dishonest.
Why People Copy: A Cultural Issue#
Content theft does not happen in a vacuum. The platform incentivizes engagement, reach, and impressions above originality. When “visibility at all costs” becomes the goal, some individuals will take shortcuts.
These shortcuts often come from:
- A desire to appear more knowledgeable than they are.
- Pressure to post regularly without the ability or willingness to create.
- The mistaken belief that popular content can be reused without consequences.
- A lack of understanding of what attribution means in a professional context.
None of these reasons justify the behavior, but they explain why it spreads.
If the platform rewards visibility more than integrity, shortcuts will always attract people who want the appearance of expertise without the substance.
How to Share Content Properly#
Sharing content responsibly is not complicated. Professionals have three legitimate options:
Use the material as inspiration and create something new.
Add your experience, refine the message, or interpret the idea differently.
That is what professionals do.Repost the original content with clear credit.
Reposting amplifies the creator rather than replacing them.Acknowledge the creator when referencing their work.
A simple mention or link is enough to avoid misrepresentation.
These actions require minimal effort but demonstrate integrity, respect, and professionalism.
The Larger Point: Integrity Still Matters#
LinkedIn may not be peer-reviewed academia, but it is still a professional space. The standards we apply should reflect that. Allowing copied content to proliferate without consequence weakens the quality of discourse and undermines genuine expertise.
Using someone else’s work without attribution is not harmless. It is not trivial.
It is misrepresentation, and it reflects poorly on the person doing it.
If content defines visibility, then integrity defines credibility.
Closing Thoughts#
The expectation of professionalism should not stop at technical skill or job performance. It applies equally to how we communicate, share, and represent ideas.
LinkedIn is a professional community, not a dumping ground for duplicated content.
If your approach to “content creation” is copying someone else’s work and presenting it as your own, you are not a creator. You are not even participating in the conversation.
You are impersonating expertise.
Professional communities deserve better, and the people who put in the effort to create original, thoughtful content deserve recognition, not to be overshadowed by imitations.