Should you ‘verify’ your LinkedIn account?
You know the deal. Try to connect with someone on LinkedIn and you get a pop-up that suggests you’ll be more credible if you verify your identity.
Publish a post and you’ll be nudged that the next step is to verify your account, because ‘people who have verified have more reach’.
One thing is for sure: LinkedIn is very, very keen that you should verify your LinkedIn account, using your passport.
But should you?
Personally, I don’t think you should. And it’s not just me. Look around at the LinkedIn gurus and geeks, and you’ll see that very few of them have opted to take that route.
My issues are both pragmatic and ethical - here’s my top three reasons for not verifying on LinkedIn.
Does verifying increase reach?
There is no evidence that verifying your account leads to favourable treatment, despite LinkedIn's (carefully worded) suggestions otherwise.
Note the slippery wording - people who have verified get more reach. That’s a pretty passive statement. It does not say people get more reach BECAUSE they have verified.
Quite simply, the people most likely to verify are the people most likely to be using the platform actively; and most likely to be posting (remember, over 90% of users DON’T post).
The people who are likely to respond to the nudges - the people most willing to ‘play the algorithmic game’ aren’t getting reach because they’ve verified. They’re getting more reach than others because they’re already active users, and the algorithm ‘rewards’ that.
Causation and correlation, right there.
Is it safe to verify - is it safe not to?
Of course, everything could change tomorrow. LinkedIn might tweak its algorithm so that people who are verified DO get rewarded with reach. But is it worth it?
Perhaps surprisingly, I’m not TOO worried about giving away such personal data to LinkedIn, specifically. The process is set up to be secure. If you’re going to put your passport online, it might as well be here.
But why should we give away our passport data? Why should we take the risk?
Quite simply, giving away our most personal of data isn’t in our interests. There are plenty of ways to ensure account security without a passport.
In data protection there’s a standard of “is this a necessary and proportionate gathering of data?”
In this case, it appears unnecessary and disproportionate.
In a rapidly changing world - and one where AI is developing more rapidly than our understanding of it - we’re on a slippery slope when we willingly offer our most personal of data to a corporate entity based in an increasingly authoritarian country.
So let’s say LinkedIn changes its algorithm and, in the future, you’ll get rewarded for verification with a few more eyeballs on your posts.
Is it worth it?
Life’s so much easier if you’re a white man
The deal breaker for me is ethical. Because verification is an equality issue.
In order for verification to be successful, the name you use on your LinkedIn profile has to match the name on your passport. And even if it’s the same? It doesn’t mean LinkedIn’s automated processes will recognise it.
This is a problem if:
-You’re a married woman who uses a different name personally and professionally (or a forward thinking man who does the same).
-You are one of the billions of people on this planet who has a name that doesn’t use the Roman alphabet.
-You are non-binary or trans-gender and the name on your passport doesn’t reflect the identity and name you use on a day-to-day basis.
So who finds it most difficult to verify? Pretty much anyone other than white men.
If a global entity designs a system that so blatantly puts so many at a disadvantage - and, after having it in place for months, has done nothing to change it - then that says a lot about its values and priorities. Being aware of this, and going ahead with verification feels to me like being a by-stander.
And that, for me, is reason enough to not play the game.
Have you verified - if so how was the process for you? Were you thinking about it but have decided not to? I’d love to hear our thoughts.