Is LinkedIn’s algorithm harder on women?

There’s been a flurry of conversations about how LinkedIn’s algorithm treats women’s content. Journalists, analysts, and everyday users have started looking closely at gender differences in reach and engagement — and the findings are prompting questions about visibility and equity on the world’s largest professional network:

• Men's posts appear to receive higher visibility and reach on LinkedIn compared with similar posts from women based on both user (casual) and designed (formal) experiments. For example:
  • An executive changed her profile gender from “female” to “male,” saw a dramatic jump in performance, and published her findings.
  • A man changed his gender to "female" and noticed a 56% drop in impressions.
  • Some women say their content performs differently depending on tone (not male enough); others believe they are being suppressed because of subject matter or language, specifically around women's health issues.
• LinkedIn issued a statement denying gender biases in its algorithm.

None of this proves intent or a clear cause, but the pattern has sparked a meaningful discussion about how algorithms reflect human biases and, in the case of LinkedIn, shape professional opportunity.

Why it Matters

LinkedIn isn’t just another social platform — it’s where people find jobs, build reputations, grow businesses, and make professional connections. If women’s posts are shown less often or rewarded less by the algorithm, even unintentionally, it could influence who gets seen, who gets opportunities, and whose expertise is viewed as credible. There could be a lot at stake.

If you're on LinkedIn and unhappy with your reach or engagement, would you consider trying a little experiment of your own?

Background

Swiss tech executive Kamales Lardi changed her LinkedIn profile from “female” to “male” for three months. She kept her content, posting frequency, and tone identical. She reported more post reach, more profile views, more connection requests, and more search visibility.

Her experience sparked global interest, and it's only one of many now coming to light. They all raise an important question: Does gender presentation influence how content performs online?

This discussion is happening at a moment when many platforms — not just LinkedIn — face scrutiny over how their algorithms reflect or amplify existing social dynamics. The topic goes beyond content strategy: it speaks to how digital visibility - and the inherent human bias in AI's development - shapes economic opportunity, especially for women who rely on LinkedIn for leads, clients, or job access.

Resources

LinkedIn - Putting members first: testing and measuring how content appears in your Feed
The Guardian - Bro boost: women say their LinkedIn traffic increases if they pretend to be men
TechFinitive - Minding the LinkedIn gender gap: does it hate women or just want them to behave more like the men that wrote the algorithms?
The Persistent - We’ve Been Here Before: What You Need to Know About the Viral LinkedIn Name-Changing Trend