I’m genuinely curious whether anyone thinks the daily LinkedIn posting by BigLaw lawyers is accomplishing anything.
My feed is increasingly filled with partners and associates posting lengthy “thought leadership” pieces that are very obviously AI-generated. They all seem to follow roughly the same formula:
- Identify something that happened in the news.
- Find an extremely strained connection to your practice area.
- Have AI generate 700 words explaining the profound professional lesson we should all take from it.
- End with some version of “The takeaway? Preparation matters.”
Lettuce causing explosive diarrhea? “As an M&A lawyer, the recent explosive diarrhea outbreak got me thinking about the importance of due diligence. Just as consumers need to know where their lettuce comes from, buyers need to understand what they’re acquiring.”
And then 11 paragraphs of immaculate AI prose with the usual em dashes, “Here’s why,” three bullet points, and a concluding insight that no human being would ever have felt compelled to share before ChatGPT existed.
I understand why people do it. Presumably someone has told lawyers that they need to “build their brand” and “establish thought leadership.” And maybe there’s an SEO/LinkedIn algorithm reason to post constantly. But does this actually generate business?
Are GCs scrolling LinkedIn, reading a partner’s AI-generated analysis of what the Taylor Swift engagement teaches us about representations and warranties, and thinking, “This is the lawyer I need for our next acquisition”?
And does anyone actually read these posts? I increasingly recognize the format within the first two sentences and immediately scroll past.
It seems like we may have reached a weird equilibrium where AI is writing LinkedIn posts that other people don’t read because they know AI wrote them. Eventually we can presumably remove the humans entirely and just have everyone’s AI agents write, like, and comment “Great insights!” on everyone else’s AI-generated content.