In my last article, I shared with you all my experience with LinkedIn during “Pride” month, as well as my larger concerns regarding the increasingly conservative-hostile environment of social media. Dissatisfied with the response of my employer, I decided to take my case to LinkedIn itself. I want to share with readers the email exchange that resulted for several reasons.
Firstly, I want to encourage readers to be bold in sending their concerns up the chain. Don’t be discouraged by the massive bureaucracy fronting social media platforms. With some patience and persistence, you can leverage the new focus of many companies on customer feedback to your advantage, and actually reach a real human being! Secondly, I want to familiarize conservative youth with the tactics and language they will likely encounter, should they be determined enough to wade through it all and do get receive an email response. Spoiler alert – don’t delude yourself into thinking you’re likely to receive any meaningful thanks for providing your feedback, or promises that any real change will be implemented. However, don’t be discouraged. One email is unlikely to be enough to set the ball in motion, but the cumulative voices of similarly minded platform users can be a real catalyst for change. Keep reading to find out how you can add your voice to that of other conservative social media users.
After being referred by my employer to LinkedIn itself, I opened a case on LinkedIn’s Help Center with the following message (the attached letter was the original one shared in my last article):
“A few weeks ago, I sent the attached letter to my employers. They kindly responded by suggesting that I contact LinkedIn, as the issue only appears able to be resolved by an increase in functionality on the part of LinkedIn. I would like to discuss with someone from the LinkedIn team the possibility of working with companies to enable their employees to choose which version of the company avatar will appear on the employee’s LinkedIn profile.
I looked forward to discussing these options with a representative of LinkedIn soon. Thank you.”
I promptly received the following from a Member Support Consultant:
“Thanks for contacting us. My name is ____ with LinkedIn Support and I’ll be helping you today.
There is a greater need now more than ever to address the intersection of equality happening across our diverse communities, including the Black and LGBTQ+ communities.
We welcome this opportunity for you to join us in ongoing learning to create a sense of belonging for individuals from all walks of life. This change is permanent throughout the month and we will not disable or remove it.
We feel it’s important to take and learn how to understand and confront bias as well as communicate about topics of difference and create change that can help us individually contribute to building a better workplace and society. To help people take the next step, we’ve made this LinkedIn Learning path on Diversity, Inclusion, and Belonging for All available for free through August 31.
Have a great day!”
While I was pleased that I had actually reached a human being on the other side of the administrative wall, I was highly disappointed and frankly confounded by the irrelevance of the support consultant’s response. I had asked for the chance to share a very specific idea with LinkedIn’s development staff. Instead, I received a seemingly canned reiteration of LinkedIn’s policies. Rather than tell me directly that my proposal was unwelcome and would not be sent higher up the chain, the consultant directed me to a lengthy, jargon-filled masterwork of diversity training (see link). Ironically, the nearly five hours of content appear to be dismally lacking in diversity, featuring only women as the eight “expert” contributors on “inclusive communication”. In exchange for sitting through this training, LinkedIn users can earn a certificate of completion, which can presumably be situated prominently on their accounts to boost social credit.
Apparently, the consultant assigned to assist me had failed to comprehend the intended meaning of my email message, and seemed to think that just a little more training would help me to see the error of my ways and obviate the need to actually address my core concern. Dissatisfied, I reopened the case (which the consultant had already closed) with the following:
“Dear _____,
Thank you very much for your email. However, I do not believe that my core concern is being addressed. My request is not for any change in LinkedIn‘s treatment of Pride issues this month, but rather for an increase in functionality that will enable users to maintain their right of expression.
A solution that comes to mind is that offered by Facebook, which allows Facebook users to apply filters or frames that indicate support of a certain cause to their profile pictures. This allows for true diversity of expression. I am requesting the opportunity to discuss this possibility with a developer on the LinkedIn team, and would like to be put in contact with someone who can truly address my legitimate concern.
I appreciate your time and consideration. Thank you!”
I was much happier with the response I got this time:
“Hi Eleanor,
Thanks for your feedback about the filter and frame options.
I’ve sent your suggestion to our product team for consideration. Taking member feedback into account, we’re always looking for ways to improve the LinkedIn experience. When many of our members ask for the same improvement, we try our best to get it done. Though immediate action may not be possible, your feedback will be incorporated into our ongoing discussions about the direction of our design and development…
Again, we appreciate the feedback and believe that together we can create great products for everyone!”
The support consultant had actually acknowledged my request and promised to send it on to the appropriate department. More importantly, LinkedIn had made it clear that they do listen when they receive similar requests from multiple members. Consequently, I encourage all IYC members and friends with LinkedIn accounts to consider submitting similar messages of concern regarding the platform’s singularly uniform promotion of highly problematic ideologies. Together, we can prevent our professional profiles from being used in the service of promoting agendas contrary to our consciences.
About The Contributor
