Lynnaire Johnston

In the last 6 months, I’ve audited 107 LinkedIn posts for clients. The most common problem isn’t lack of experience. It’s this: They’re unsure how to write FROM their Lived Experience. Writing generic advice → easy to share. Writing from Lived Experience → easy to trust. More trust = more $$$ opportunities. Here’s 5 steps to turn your Lived Experience into LinkedIn posts that actually make your reader think “YES, I trust this person”: 1. Start with something you’ve actually done Don’t write “10 tips for growing on LinkedIn” if you haven’t grown on LinkedIn. Instead write: “When I started posting on LinkedIn, I thought I had to be a great writer. Turns out, I didn’t.” Use your story as the entry point. That’s what makes it feel real. 2. Use first-person language Write using “I”, “me” and “my”. Not “you should” because that’s generic advice that anyone could write. When you say “I struggled with…” or “I realised that…” you are pulling people into your actual experience. 3. Use real context When did this happen? What were you trying to do? What was the challenge? The more specific the context, the more relatable your post becomes. 4. Talk about what changed What was the realisation? What did you figure out? What decision did you make People don’t just want to know what you did, they want to know how you got there so they can also get there. 5. Show small wins, not just big numbers You don’t need to pull out crazy, multi million dollar revenue screenshots to build credibility. In fact, I’d argue that makes you less credible and less believable. Even simple lines like: "I used to average 200 impressions but now I’m seeing 2,000 regularly"…are enough to show realistic, attainable progress without feeling like you’re bragging. TL;DR: This is how you write from Lived Experience. It’s simple, relatable and human. You’ve already got the content because you’ve lived it. You just need to start documenting it ✌️ This is just ONE strategy I teach my clients to grow their LinkedIn audience. Here’s a 30 page book I wrote with more strategies for you (for free): https://lnkd.in/eJvYp7wa

372

266 Comments

I used to love reading the comments. But now they feel like AI spam Last week, I was analysing my clients comments section I found 80% of the comments feel robotic They don't have any human touch Here's how AI comments are drowning your posts - Robotic comments lose emotion - Lack of chances that your profile is visited - They’re the red signal for your authenticity - Similar and repeated comments fill the box - Your comments get buried under other comments Your comments are the first chance to attract leads 5 out of 10 people visit profiles seeing an interesting comment So your GPT comments push the leads away Here's how you can write comments that people love to read: 1. Write how you talk 2. Add some humor when it fits. 3. Ask questions to spark curiosity 4. Share personal thoughts and ideas 5. Use emotional tone to sound human Boom Now you stand out. Your comments do more than you think. Write it thoughtfully. Don't let AI take your place. Write one comment at a time. Follow Mallika Some for more such insights.

153

88 Comments

5 benefits of publishing your thinking online (even if "no-one's reading yet") 1) Ideas build on ideas Last week's rough thought connects to this week's experience, and is refined by next week's reflection. 2) The right people find you Quality readers accumulate slowly and quietly. Some of your most important connections will read for months without announcing themselves. (Not even the simplest of thumbs-ups). 3) Frees space in your brain Vague instincts become clear when you're forced to explain your half-formed ideas to the world Patterns you "just know" evolve into teachable steps once written down or recorded. 4) Your name becomes the distribution Quality readers enjoy your posts regardless of metrics, as they read first and judge later. 5) You build an evergreen digital library Instead of "creating content" view it as intellectual infrastructure. Each post becomes a building block in your searchable second brain. Digitized, labeled, ready for infinite retrieval, and training your personal AI. TL;DR You're either building intellectual assets or letting them depreciate in your head. _____________________ Pic:  Spent the week catching up with friends in London because I built a business that doesn't need me to be at my desk 10 hours a day.

40

21 Comments

Most writers don’t fail because of bad ideas. They fail because their writing is too damn heavy. In the 1920s, Edwin Perkins had a thriving little mail-order business( that he ran out of the back room of the local post office). One of his bestsellers? A liquid concentrate called Fruit Smack. But there was a problem. Shipping glass bottles was expensive. They broke. They leaked. Customers complained. Instead of giving up, Perkins reimagined the product. What if the flavor could be condensed into powder? Small, light, and easy to ship. That pivot created Kool-Aid. A product so simple kids could mix it themselves. Cheap. Portable. Scalable. What does this have to do with writing? Your ideas are the “Fruit Smack.” If they’re too heavy, too complicated, too hard to deliver—your readers won’t stick around. The fix. Do what Perkins did. Strip it down. Make it portable. Create writing so clear and easy to consume that anyone can “mix it themselves.” Because great businesses—and great writing—aren’t built on complexity. They’re built on ideas packaged so well, they spread. So next time you write, ask yourself: Have I made this easy enough for my reader to consume every word. Every sentence. Every paragraph.

93

28 Comments

I coined the term knowledge vampirism to describe what happens when people feed off your work, your language, and your ideas without ever naming their source. It can sound like: • Reframing your insight and teaching it back to you as if it were their own • Avoiding your terminology but using your frameworks and examples • Positioning themselves as the educator of something you’ve spent years mapping out • Shifting the definition of an established term while claiming ownership of it Many mistake this for flattery, laziness, or lack of originality. It's not. Knowledge vampirism is envy disguised as collaboration. It's driven by: • Shame for being less credible, authoritative, or influential than their peer • Envy because they want what the other person has, not by building it themselves, but by displacing the person who earned it • Resentment that their peer holds recognition they believe should belong to them These are not always distant competitors. They can be peers, colleagues, clients, even supervisors. People who have interacted with you, learned your thinking, process, and approach. Some even tried to alter the definition of knowledge vampirism itself and teach it back to me as though they had always known it. This is often not conscious. It's a way of equalising a power dynamic after feeling overshadowed. They might believe they're collaborating while actually displacing the original source. But knowledge vampirism is not collaboration. It's a status game. It takes your intellectual labour and uses it to grow someone else’s authority, often in the very space you pioneered. The most powerful move is not confrontation. It's creation. Codify your frameworks. Reclaim your language. Publish your work in places that make attribution undeniable. Because vampirism only works in the dark. When you turn on the light, the true source is clear. 🔗 I wrote more about this dynamic in my article on toxic collaboration: https://lnkd.in/gRFhfy5X 📫 If you’ve realised you’re in a collaboration with a knowledge vampire and want out tactfully without triggering retaliation, I help leaders and professionals plan their exits. DM me or book a consult. Link in profile.

373

149 Comments

Proofreading vs proof-editing: my take. When I started out, back in 2012, I found myself doing more than a traditional proofread. That meant I wasn't only correcting what was "wrong" (proofreading) but offering suggestions to make the text more readable (proof-editing). I work with marketing and comms teams, content marketing agencies, charities, organisations and small businesses, who don't work with editors. I'd be working on raw text – text that hasn't been professionally edited. My eagle eyes would be the first to see it. There was no in-house or external editorial process. "Do whatever needs doing” quickly became my standard proofreading practice because I WAS the process. What I was doing didn't feel like copy-editing because it was language-focused rather than content-focused. But it wasn't proofreading either. Still, marketing teams and comms agencies would ask me to: overhaul the clunky sentences I’d highlighted trim the text (because it had exceeded the word count) rewrite areas I'd politely noted were repetitive. Time was of the essence (when isn't it?), and they trusted me to improve their writing. Proof-editing involves greater collaboration because I work with you to make your/your team's writing sound even better than before. Now you could argue this comes down to semantics. If you're happy with my changes and suggestions, what does it matter what the service is called? That's all well and good if you're charging for the work you're doing. I wasn't, so I separated the services (not as soon as I should have, mind). Not all copy-editors are proofreaders. They're different skill sets. And not all clients will know the difference between proofreading and proof-editing. It's up to us to be clear on what we do and what we don't do. Meghan Downs at Jammy Digital says: "The standard of work wouldn’t be as high without Yasmin. We’re writers, not trained proofreaders or proof-editors. Yasmin gives me the peace of mind not just that the work’s been done, but that it’s been done to a better standard.” 👏🏻 Here's some cool doodle art by the talented Amy Nolan. Couldn't believe my luck when I spotted this on her site. 🤡 I promise I bought it from her. I'm not using this ILLEAGALLY.

73

22 Comments

If you have (or write for) a mental health website, You NEED to know about this 👇🏼 The Online Safety Act - the UK’s new online regulation. This was first announced in 2023, but it came into force this year. This Act is designed to… 1. Hold websites accountable for user safety. 2. Protect children from harmful online content (yippee!) 3. Create clearer rules on how harmful content is moderated online. This is, in my opinion, excellent news. But it’s important for website owners (and writers) in the MH space to know about it. It applies to any MH website with… 1. A forum. 2. Resource hubs. 3. Peer-support groups. So, if your site has any of these, here’s what you need to know… 1. Age verification → Your site must prevent under-18s from accessing harmful content (i.e. by using age-gating tools). 2. Content moderation  → You need clear policies and active systems for flagging and removing harmful content. Manual checks aren’t enough. 3. User control features  → Filters or warnings are important to allow users to control their exposure to sensitive material. Ofcom can request evidence that you’ve considered the risks your platform may pose, so risk-assessing is a must. If your website doesn’t comply, you could be fined 10% of your global turnover, or your site may be blocked. Did you know about this? ♻️ Repost this to raise NEEDED awareness #mentalhealth #mentalhealthawareness #therapy #therapist #mentalhealthmatters #mentalhealthsupport

57

47 Comments

Someone asked me last week, “Kevin, is AI going to replace us?” I laughed. Not because it’s a dumb question, but because I’ve heard it for 25 years. Back when we were building the first AI virtual assistant, people thought it was a gimmick. Now, suddenly, everyone’s paying attention. Here’s what I’ve learned after decades building this tech: 👉 AI won’t replace leaders. But leaders who ignore AI? They’ll be replaced. Fast. On the IDEAS+LEADERS podcast with Dr Elena Pawęta, I broke down: ✅ Where AI is already changing work and life ✅ What industries are about to get blindsided ✅ How to build “innovation DNA” into any company If you’re leading a team, building a business, or just curious where this is going, this episode will make you think. Apple: https://apple.co/3fKv9IH Spotify: https://sptfy.com/Nrtq

210

15 Comments

Editing someone else’s writing? Sometimes, you just need to get the document out the door. But, as a supervisor, ideally you want to use your editing to help the writer improve (which will save you time on future documents).  To do that, don’t just forward the redlined document to the writer. Use Word’s “Comment” function (or spend one-on-one time with the writer) to discuss what works and what doesn’t work in the document. Here are some suggestions for your comments or discussion: ► Avoid harsh language. Your feedback shouldn’t feel like a personal attack. Be constructive. ❌ “This is a confusing mess.” ✅ “I’m confused here. The reader is likely to get lost. Starting with an overview would help." Focus on the writer’s message and how it is (or isn’t) being communicated. That will help the writer keep the reader’s needs in mind.  ► Be specific in your suggestions.  ❌ “Pls fix”  ✅ “Needs to be more concise. In this section, delete unnecessary details. Throughout, eliminate ‘throat clearing’ intros and unnecessary prepositional phrases. I’ve edited the first page to demonstrate.” ► Provide the reasoning behind your edits.  ✅ "This sentence is hard to read because it’s too long. To make it easier to read, I’ve broken it up into two sentences.” ► Focus on substantive edits that improve communication and persuasiveness. While grammatical and punctuation errors need to be addressed, don’t spend all your time on them. Your comments should relate to the writing and how it is (or is not) meeting the reader’s needs. The time spent now will save you editing time on future documents.

55

12 Comments