Jeremy Boissinot's Recent LinkedIn Posts

It baffles me that plagiarism is so tolerated on social media. It should be a career death sentence for any creator. How can you claim credibility after stealing someone's content, when the whole point of being a creator is...creating content? At Favikon, every time we get flagged that someone plagiarized a post, we apply a permanent ranking penalty. No exception, unless there's a public apology. Look at what happened to Magali De Reu's post. Her name is LITERALLY on the image. And yet hundreds of people shared it, reposted it, screenshot it, without a single credit. Her work went viral on Twitter/X, her name got erased in the process. Even worse, for the most part these aren't anonymous accounts. These are founders, marketers, "thought leaders" with thousands of followers, treating someone else's work like stock footage. Two nuances I'll grant: - Some creators use ghostwriters, and the ghostwriter might have pulled it without the creator knowing (check Jason Feifer post on this). Somewhat excusable, but in 2026 you should have full control over what goes out under your name. - Others are so algorithm-brained they've lost track of where ideas come from. They scroll, absorb, repackage, and genuinely believe they came up with it. That's not malice, but it's still theft. Either way, the result is the same: someone's original work gets strip-mined for engagement by people who contributed nothing. We built Favikon's ranking system to punish this. If you can't create, at least have the decency to credit.

Something that doesn't get talked about enough: the struggle of using multiple languages on LinkedIn. Engage with a post in another language, and your feed becomes 80% that language. I just ran this experiment myself. Worse, it starts showing that content to your audience, which can turn them off entirely. So LinkedIn basically forces you into one language. At Favikon, we used to publish posts in several languages to grow our rankings across markets. The algorithm tanked every time. After testing this extensively, the rules are clear: ✅  Stick to one language only ❌ Never engage with content in another language (or do it very rarely) ❌ Never mix languages in a single post. We tested this. It tanks you. The algorithm doesn't know which audience to distribute it to, so it effectively shows it to no one. This is a real problem for anyone building an international audience. LinkedIn treats multilingual users like a bug, not a feature. I chose English, so I have to stick to English content. My French ancestors are rolling in their graves. Désolé, grand-mère. The algorithm said no.

The team is almost full for 2026. Almost. We're still missing one position, and honestly, it's the one I'd want if I were starting my career right now. Creative Content Lead at Favikon. Here's what the role actually looks like day to day: - Create content across formats and platforms (video, graphics, written) - Build and execute content strategies for multiple initiatives - Be comfortable on camera and behind the lens (you'll be the face of the company) - Work closely with two department heads and a small content team - Be super active on LinkedIn We're a team of 10+ nationalities serving brands and creators across 110+ countries. The work is global. The energy is real. The requirements are simple: creative, fluent in English, based in Paris, and a high authenticity score (of course) This is a junior role. Fresh degree is fine! 1 to 3 years of experience is ideal, internships count. What we care about is that you genuinely love the creator economy, not just follow it. Apply here: https://lnkd.in/eYYBUXNZ One thing before you do: read the full job description. There's a specific way to apply, and 95% of candidates miss it. Don't be that person. If you know someone who'd be a fit, tag them below ✍

I will become a dad soon. I'm already in full training mode. Slippers on. Stroller assembled. Doing test laps around the living room with nobody inside it 😂 I spent the last few years building a company from scratch. Late nights, tough calls, moments where I had no idea what I was doing but figured it out anyway. People told me that was hard. I have a feeling I haven't seen anything yet. What I do know is this: I moved from Paris to the French Riviera because I believe you don't have to sacrifice your life to build something meaningful. That belief is about to be tested in a whole new way. We're expecting a baby girl. And I already can't wait to meet her 💛 Dads: what's the one thing you wish someone told you before day one?

This is MASSIVE. LinkedIn just confirmed they're going after automated comments. Browser extensions, scripts, third-party tools, all penalized. Great first step. But let's be real, most pod users aren't using automated tools. They comment manually, coordinate off-platform, and LinkedIn has no way of spotting them. This is where we come in. Our algorithm gives us a clear picture of who's gaming the system. And we actually just updated it, because our last rankings made it obvious that in some countries, a few creators were still slipping through. Introducing Authenticity Score v1.6: → Less tolerance for automated comments → Engagement score below 85 = penalty → Pod patterns detected = bigger ranking drop → Rankings updated within a week (If you've played League of Legends, this whole process feels exactly like reading patch notes lol) LinkedIn is cleaning house from the platform side. We're cleaning house from the data side. Let's go. PS: Huge shoutout to everyone helping us make our rankings more accurate and relevant. Special mention to Michelle J Raymond and Britta Behrens 💡, you two really rock. This gets better because of people like you.

Creators have found yet another way to fake influence here. No engagement pods. No risky fake accounts. Just company pages they fully control. Here's how it works: they post something, then a bunch of company pages they own start commenting and reposting within the first 20 minutes. We've found creators running up to 15 company pages doing this on every single post. Company pages have a lot of advantages for this: - Full control. No coordinating with anyone, no one posting late and killing your momentum window. - Invisible by design. LinkedIn rarely shows company page comments in your feed, so nobody sees it happening. It looks like normal brand activity. - Lower risk. Fake personal account gets banned, the trail leads back to you. A company page gets flagged, you lose the page. Your real profile stays untouched. - Harder to flag. Company pages aren't subject to the same automation behavior detection as personal accounts. They fly under the radar way more easily. And the algorithm rewards it anyway. Early comments and reposts signal that content is taking off, which pushes it to more people before real engagement even starts. We spotted this across dozens of accounts. Same pattern every time: company pages with zero other activity, always on the same creator, always within 20 minutes of posting. Manufactured engagement. Real reach. And nobody sees it coming. So yeah, if you're evaluating someone's LinkedIn influence, look at who's actually commenting. Not just how many people are. PS: we're building this into Favikon's authenticity score as we speak. Massive thanks to Jesus Serrano for bringing this to us with proofs!

Been silent these days. Elena Freeman and I have been building something global in the creator economy. London this week. San Francisco in 2 weeks. Then New York, LA, Cannes, and cities across the world. We're building something that's never been done before. Pure meritocracy. Real diversity. No BS. If you know, you know. For everyone else, all I'll say is: watch this space.

LinkedIn doesn't like creators. But probably not for the reason you think: Look at LinkedIn's three biggest moats in social media right now: 1. Super safe, polished environment 2. 100% real identities (in an age of AI slop) 3. Prestigious and job-focused So what scares them makes total sense: slopification of the feed, and content creation for the sake of content creation. Their priority is quality and expertise. And they've made it obvious through recent strategic decisions: - Creator programs shut down - Top Voice purge (native creators lost their badges; experts and CEOs got them instead) - Active crackdown on engagement pods that are rewarding the wrong content; That's why LinkedIn is actively distancing itself from the word "creator." They don't want to be the platform where people create content. They want to be the platform where interesting, smart people share what they know. Spot the difference. One attracts content machines. The other attracts experts, founders, and operators who have something real to say. So they're betting hard on thought leadership. The 360Brew program is a clear signal: LinkedIn is hand-picking professionals with genuine domain expertise and giving them distribution, not rewarding whoever games the algorithm best. They're also building a marketplace designed to connect those experts with brands for consulting gigs, speaking engagements, real deals. The goal is to make LinkedIn the place where expertise converts into revenue, not where content converts into followers. The shift in mindset matters here. Don't try to be the best "creator" in the US for SAAS. Become the best SAAS expert in the US. LinkedIn will reward that.

We're closing our fundraising round in 2 weeks. And something happened that I didn't fully expect when we started this process: our creators committed over €300K to invest in Favikon. These are people who use the platform every day. They decided to put their own money behind it. That kind of trust hits different than a wire from a fund. We just opened a SPV to let a few more creators in before we close. Last seats. What makes this round special to me: we now have investors from 20+ countries. Not just capital, but a global network of people who genuinely understand the creator economy because they live in it. This global footprint is going to matter a lot. We've been working on something behind the scenes, and our investors are the only ones who know about it right now 👀 If you're a creator and you want in, DM me. Two weeks left, then we close for good.

Tell me you like to live dangerously without telling me you like to live dangerously

LinkedIn is the #1 platform for thought leaders. We just released 100 rankings of top LinkedIn profiles worldwide, selected from over 1 million rankings across 100 countries and niches. These rankings show the diversity of what LinkedIn has become: from oncologists to journalists, VCs to HR leaders, cybersecurity experts to supply chain managers, architects to climate scientists. The latest Top Voice update confirms it: LinkedIn is clearly prioritizing expertise. Every industry now has its own ecosystem with real subject-matter experts shaping the conversation. For businesses and creators alike, this is competitive intelligence. You can see which voices dominate your space, how your competitors' thought leaders stack up, and where your industry's conversation is heading. Over the past year, the platform changed significantly: - The Favikon Authenticity Score filtered out pods and fake engagement - LinkedIn's algorithm started rewarding real, valuable content over engagement hacks The result? The most accurate LinkedIn ranking ever made. A clear map of who's actually driving B2B influence today. Whether you're building executive visibility, identifying brand ambassadors, or sizing up the competition, start here. PS: Click on the save button. You'll need a few weeks to go through it all.

We're human. We make mistakes. Every ranking release comes with a bunch of behind-the-scenes screw-ups you never see. Here are some for this week's release: - A Norwegian climate scientist ended up in the Top 10 Female creators. Our AI saw blond hair + the name "Kim" and just went with it. Classic. (sorry again about that Kim Noguera Gabrielli, it's fixed now) - A creator in the DRC faked a visual to make it look like he was ranked. It blew up into a massive public fight between him and another creator. That one got out of hand fast. - A sales creator somehow landed in the Top Oncologists ranking. I still don't know how that happened. Neither does he. - One podder figured out how to game our system and shot to #1 in his country. A few people reached out in DM about that. We're fine-tuning our authenticity score with updates coming up next week. - A creator's profile picture got swapped with someone else's during a ranking release. This one is a classic. Some people use these mistakes to call Favikon a "scam," saying we get paid by creators to move them up. Trust me, I wish, but that business model is already taken by another company starting with F. And yes, as usual, some say podders get boosted in rankings, which, if you think about it for two seconds, would be terrible for us. Here's the reality. We now have millions of rankings (yes, millions) covering +150 countries across 1,000+ niches on 7 platforms. That's a lot of room for things to go wrong, and sometimes they do. I personally spend a full day every week manually checking the relevance of key countries, industries, and niches. The team puts real work into every single ranking release. We do all of this because we believe every creator deserves to be seen. Not just the ones with millions of followers. Rankings are how we put creators in the spotlight who would otherwise stay invisible, and bring more diversity to an industry that badly needs it. There are incredible creators in every country, every niche, every platform, and most of them never get the recognition they deserve. And let's be honest, it's also great for our visibility. But that's the point: when creators win, we win too. 99% of the reactions are positive. And to those people, from the bottom of our hearts: thank you 🩷 We're not perfect yet. But we're getting there.

I reached out to our users to offer them a chance to invest in Favikon. Same message. Same person. 500x difference in response rate. - I posted on LinkedIn (45K followers): 3 DMs. - I emailed a 15K userbase: 500 replies. 0.007% vs 3.3%. The algorithm buried me. My list didn't. That's the whole lesson on audience ownership, right there. We're ending our fundraising right now, and this week genuinely moved me. I really was not expecting this. I sent the email on a Tuesday evening, went to sleep, woke up to hundreds of replies from people who use Favikon every day, people who believe in what we're building, people who wrote paragraphs about why they want in. Some of them I've never spoken to. Some of them have been with us since the early days. All of them took the time to respond. That doesn't happen by accident. Creators are at the core of everything we're doing in 2026, a full creator plan revamp, a new global creator club, and honestly this week just locked it in for me. We're building this for them. Full stop. And I know I talk a lot about the creator economy, about authenticity, about not chasing vanity metrics. But sometimes you need a concrete slap in the face to really feel it. 45K followers sounds great at a dinner party. A community that actually responds when you reach out is actually the real thing. Your list is an asset. Your follower count is rented space. Round closes end of month. DM me now to own a piece of Favikon and help us rule the creator economy together ✍

We're building the Wikipedia for creators. That's why we've made all creator profiles completely free and open to everyone. Take someone like 🦄 Peter Steinberger. A developer who came back from retirement to build Openclaw saw his audience explode +732% in 9 months, and now ranks in the top 1% of AI creators worldwide. All of that, captured in a single profile anyone can access (and much more) There are millions of creators out there, and no single place where you can look someone up and instantly understand who they are, what they talk about, how fast they're growing, and where they rank in their niche. That's the gap we're filling with X-Ray. A public, open profile for every creator on the internet. Content breakdown, top quote, growth trends, global rankings. All in one place, all free. The creator economy is massive but still opaque. Brands don't know who to trust. Creators can't benchmark themselves. Journalists, investors, researchers have no reliable reference point. A shared source of truth would change how the entire ecosystem operates. That's what we're building. Indexing every creator the way Wikipedia indexed human knowledge is not a small bet. But if this economy is going to mature, it needs public infrastructure like this. The profiles are live. Search any creator and see for yourself.

A hill I'll die on: good weather doesn't make you lazy. It makes you sharper. After a week of rainy Paris, I landed back in Cannes and had more done by 10am than most full office days. Sun hits different when your office view is a fountain and a marina. There's something about natural light, warmth on your face, and not feeling like you're trapped inside a grey snow globe that just... unlocks something in your brain. The lazy-in-the-sun thing is a myth built by people who've never actually lived somewhere beautiful. You don't slow down. You stop wasting energy fighting your environment. Sorry not sorry to all my British followers 😄

I saw a post last week that made me stop scrolling. It was about us. It wasn't good. Dr. Mic Merritt found themselves in our database, represented in a way that wasn't them. Not even close. They paid to fix it. Our platform still wouldn't let them. When support finally stepped in, we got it wrong again. Favikon's entire reason for existing is to celebrate creator diversity. We serve customers across 100+ countries, our own team is 10 nationalities, and the whole product is built on the belief that every creator's voice and identity has value. You can't claim that and then force people into a box they don't belong in. France doesn't legally recognize non-binary as a category. Fine. But our platform isn't France. Our users are 90% global, and so is our responsibility. We shipped the fix. We're now actively going through our entire database and re-indexing creators who have publicly identified as non-binary. That will take time. In the meantime, any creator can update their own profile directly on the app, and the trial is free. But the fast turnaround isn't the point. The point is we should have thought about this before someone had to make noise to get our attention. We can always do better. We have to.

"Influencer marketing doesn't work anymore" Meanwhile, this company just hit $300M ARR in 11 months. Almost ENTIRELY off creator distribution. Higgsfield AI launched a program where creators get paid based on virality. In 20 days, 10,000 creators submitted 50,000 videos. 2,500 pieces of content per day, all spreading organically across social. - 15 million users. - 4.5 million video clips generated daily. - Revenue doubled from $100M to $200M in two weeks. Their biggest advertising expense isn't TV spots or Google Ads. It's paying creators. The companies saying influencer marketing is dead are still measuring it like it's 2018. The ones winning built their entire growth engine around creators. I've been in the creator economy for years and I've never seen numbers like this. Most textbook creator-led growth strategy I've come across. $300M ARR. 11 months. Creator-led. But sure, influencer marketing doesn't work.

Seb Johnson 📊🇪🇺 with 7K followers on X just made $1K in 5 weeks. He posts on LinkedIn too. 100K followers. LinkedIn paid him → $0. Here's why that's a billion-dollar mistake for LinkedIn: There's a good reason X pays creators and LinkedIn doesn't. 1. X lost its advertisers 2. Creators lost their sponsorship layer 3. X had to step in and pay creators directly Pay creators from platform revenue, keep them posting, keep the content engine alive. A survival mechanism disguised as generosity. LinkedIn has the opposite situation. Creators on LinkedIn can monetize through: 1. Sponsored content 2. Lead gen 3. Consulting deals 4. SaaS pipeline 5. Recruiting On LinkedIn, money comes from what your audience does for your business, not from the platform paying you per view. So LinkedIn doesn't need a creator fund, right? ❌ Wrong. Money from the platform hits different. $50 or $500 landing in your account from a dashboard → dopamine hit that no indirect pipeline metric can replicate. It makes you want to post more. It validates the work on days when the leads aren't flowing. And LinkedIn needs you to keep posting. No good organic content → the feed dies → the ad business suffers. Here's what a LinkedIn creator fund would look like at $0.50 CPM (what X pays today): 📌 100K impressions/month → $50/month → $600/year 📌 500K impressions/month → $250/month → $3,000/year 📌 1M impressions/month → $500/month → $6,000/year 📌 5M impressions/month → $2,500/month → $30,000/year None of these are life-changing for serious creators. That's the point. The real money on LinkedIn still comes from your business, your clients, your deals. The payout is just a nudge. A little reward that says "we see you, keep going." --- LinkedIn made over $16B in revenue last year. A creator fund at this scale → rounding error on their P&L. But it would lock in the best B2B content creators on the internet. X proved the mechanic works. LinkedIn just needs to copy it, not the desperation behind it.

The top LinkedIn influencers across 6 countries all have one thing in common. Almost none of them earned their spot through content. I looked at the current Top 20 LinkedIn rankings in the US, UK, France, India, Brazil, and Germany. 120 creators total. Here's what stands out: 📌 CEO/founder dominance is overwhelming. Across all six countries, C-suite executives and founders hold 70-80% of the top 20 slots. LinkedIn didn't become a creator platform. It became a broadcast channel for people who were already famous. 📌 Each country reflects its own power structure. The US list is the most eclectic: @Obama, Reese Witherspoon, MrBeast, Lex Fridman. The UK skews traditional business. Brazil is almost entirely banking CEOs. Germany is industrial and energy (Mercedes-Benz, Siemens, Volkswagen, Lufthansa). France is half politicians (Macron #1, Attal, Lecornu). India leans tech founders and motivational figures. 📌 Politicians have figured it out. Macron, Modi, von der Leyen all rank #1 in their countries. LinkedIn has become a soft channel for reaching professional audiences without media filtering. The platform seems fine with it. 📌 AI is the one topic that competes with status. Demis Hassabis, Andrew Ng, Mustafa Suleyman, Arthur Mensch, Yann LeCun all show up. It's the only subject where expertise alone can crack the top 20. 📌 The gender gap is brutal. Count the women across all 120 spots. The US is the most balanced (Melinda French Gates, Sara Davies, Reese Witherspoon, Asha Sharma, Leila Hormozi). Brazil has 4. Germany and India are almost entirely men. If LinkedIn's top creators reflect professional influence, the platform is mirroring existing power imbalances. 📌 LinkedIn-first creators will come from. The US is the only list where pure content creators crack the top 20. Jimmy Donaldson (MrBeast) and Lex Fridman built their audiences outside LinkedIn and ported them over. No other country has that. Everyone else got there through institutional position first. LinkedIn's algorithm rewards authority, not originality. A mid-level marketing manager could write the exact same post as Gary Vaynerchuk and get 12 likes. The algorithm weighs who you are (title, follower count, network density) far more than what you say. That's a structural choice by LinkedIn, and these rankings are the direct result. 📌 The fight for authenticity is real, and it's working. LinkedIn has been cracking down on pods for months. At Favikon, our authenticity score does the same thing from the outside: separating real influence from inflated reach. The 20-30 usual suspects who dominate every top list rank much lower in our system. Because reach without authenticity is just noise. LinkedIn is at a crossroads. It can keep rewarding status and job titles, or it can shift toward rewarding genuine expertise and original thinking. The creators who actually move their audience will win either way. The question is whether our rankings will ever reflect that.

We've had great results with Reddit, but the moderation is a real problem. Half the Favikon team is currently banned or restricted 🤣 The reason: "Vote manipulation." Because our team members engage on our own subreddit. You know, the subreddit we created specifically so people could join our conversations publicly. Of course 100% of their engagement is on r/favikon. They're busy building a company. They don't have time to browse r/gaming between sprints. Reddit for Business, you should do better. You can't court brands and then punish their teams for actually showing up on the platform.

Facebook trying to bribe creators to use their platform in 2026

Many people in my DMs complain about their "low" authenticity score. Guys, this is what a low authenticity score looks like 👇

Fabrizio Romano destroyed 10 years of credibility in 2 minutes and 14 seconds. And it's a masterclass in what NOT to do in influencer marketing. 20M+ followers. Top 1 Sport journalist in the world. "Here we go" is a cultural moment. Ten years of trust built scoop by scoop. Then he posted a paid #ad for KSRelief, Saudi Arabia's humanitarian PR arm. Here's why it's a failure for everyone involved: ❌ He has no business talking about this His audience follows him for transfer scoops, not geopolitical takes. When you step that far outside your lane with an #ad tag, nobody thinks "oh interesting." They think "how much did they pay him?" This is the first rule of influencer marketing: the creator must have topical authority on what they're promoting. Without it, the #ad tag stops being a legal disclosure and becomes a confession. Essentially, it's the equivalent of Justin Welsh promoting a fast food chain on LinkedIn. ❌ Trust is asymmetric Ten years to build, one post to crack. If he'll promote Saudi humanitarian PR, what else is he willing to say for money? That question contaminates everything, including the transfer scoops. In influencer marketing, credibility IS the product. The moment your audience doubts your independence, your conversion rates, your engagement quality, your brand value, all of it collapses. ❌ 11.9M views means nothing When all comments call you out, you're just getting a public trial. This is why smart brands measure sentiment, not just impressions. Every brand evaluating Fabrizio for a future campaign will now see this. One bad partnership poisons the well for every deal that comes after. ❌ Both sides failed KSrelief picked reach over relevance. Rookie mistake. The best creator campaigns work when the audience thinks "yeah, that tracks." A football journalist promoting Saudi state initiatives tracks for nobody. Fabrizio's team failed to protect his most valuable asset. And the agency that brokered this optimized for the wrong metric entirely. Relevance is the foundation of influence. Trade it for reach, you lose both. And for Fabrizio's credibility? Here we go... straight down.

I'm not at SXSW this year for one reason: we've been heads down on a big project launching in London and San Francisco over the next few weeks. If you're in London on March 17-18 or in San Francisco from March 29 to April 2, reach out. Would love to meet in person. I might even tell you what we've been cooking 👀

Yeah sex is cool but have you ever been the dumbest person in a room and felt great about it (that's how you know you've hired well)