Tag Archives: LinkedIn

Making Case Studies (and Other Content) Specific So Prospects Act

(Imagen 4)

Tech CMOs want to move their prospects to act and buy world-changing offerings (products or services) from their firms…and I want to move my tech CMO prospects to act and buy marketing and writing services from Bredemarket. So tech CMOs, I definitely feel your pain. But how can you move your prospects…and how can I move you?

Failure of a vague problem, solution, and results

In my recent post about converting an end customer interview into a case study, I discussed a “problem, solution, results” simple case study outline.

Justin Welsh just discussed the same thing, but with better words.

“I copy/pasted a spreadsheet of over 100 posts I’ve written that created real impact for my readers into ChatGPT, and I found a pattern:

“Specific struggle + specific transformation = lasting change

“Not some vague tension. Not a generic transformation. Specific moments where everything shifted.”

My specific solution

Of course the dozen case studies I ghostwrote for my client were implicitly specific. But it’s helpful to make that word “specific” explicit.

Imagen 4.
  • Because my client had a specific problem. The client needed its prospects to understand how its offering could solve nagging prospect problems. Riots. Car thefts. Robberies.
  • And my client had a specific solution. I can’t reveal the solution without giving the client away, but let’s just say the the solution simultaneously addressed the end customers’ dual needs of speed and accuracy, as well as other end customer concerns.
  • As for specific results, I confess I don’t know. In this case my client never got back to me and said, “John, case study 3 attracted a prospect that ended up buying an annual contract.” And my primary contact at the client subsequently moved to another firm. But the fact that the client stuck with me for a dozen case studies and some subsequent NIST FRTE analysis work indicates that I did something right.

You see what I did there. Well, as much as I could while preserving my ghostwriter status and my client’s anonymity.

What is your specific problem?

This section of the blog post is specifically addressed to tech CMOs and other marketers. The rest of you can skip this part and watch this entertaining video instead.

Imagen 4.

Now I know I’ve loaded this post with links to previous Bredemarket content that addresses the…um…specific topics in much more detail. Maybe you clicked on the links, or maybe you didn’t. I will find out.

But if you are ready to move forward, this is the one link you need to click. (“Now you tell me, John!”) It lets you set up a meeting with Bredemarket to discuss your specific needs.

When Social Platforms Convert Users Into Identity Verification Salespeople

(Imagen 4)

(Author’s preface: I was originally going to schedule this post for the middle of next week. But by the time I wrote it, the end of the post referenced a current event of astronomical proportions. Since said current event may be forgotten by the middle of next week, I am publishing it now.)

As a proponent of identity verification and a biometric product marketing expert I should like this…but I don’t.

I got the message and the message is clear

You get a message on a platform from someone you don’t know. The message may look something like this:

“John ,

“I hope this message finds you well. I came across your profile and was truly impressed by your background. While I’m not a recruiter, I’m assisting in connecting talented professionals with a startup that is working on a unique initiative.

“Given your experience, I believe you could be a fantastic fit for their senior consultant role. If you’re open to exploring this opportunity, I’d be happy to share more details and introduce you to the team directly. Please let me know if you’re interested!”

Let’s count the red flags in this message, which is one I actually received on May 30 from someone named David Joseph:

  • The author was truly impressed by my background, but didn’t cite any specifics about my background that impressed them. This exact same message could be sent to a biometric product marketing expert, a nuclear physicist, or a store cashier.
  • The author is not a recruiter, but a connector who will presumably pass me on to someone else. Why doesn’t the “someone else” contact me directly?
  • The whole unidentified startup working on a unique initiative story. Yes, some companies operate as stealth firms before revealing their corporate identity. Amway. Prinerica. Countless MLMs with bad reputations. Trust me, these initiatives are not unique.
  • That senior consultant title. Not junior consultant. Senior consultant. To make that envelope stuffing role even more prestigious.

I got the note and the note is even clearer

But I wasn’t really concerned with the message. I get these messages all the time.

So what concerned me?

The note attached to the message by the platform that hosted the message.

“Don’t know David? Ask David to verify their profile information before responding for added security.”

The platform, if you haven’t already guessed, is LinkedIn, the message a LinkedIn InMail.

Let’s follow the trail.

  • LinkedIn let “David” use the platform without verifying his identity or verifying that Randstad is truly his employer as his profile states.
  • LinkedIn sold “David” a bunch of InMail credits so that he could privately share this unique opportunity.
  • Now LinkedIn wants me to do its dirty work and say, “Hey David, why don’t you verify your profile?”

Now the one thing in LinkedIn’s favor is that LinkedIn—unlike Meta—lets its users verify their profiles for free. Meta charges you for this.

But again, why should I do LinkedIn’s dirty work?

Why doesn’t LinkedIn prevent users from sending InMails unless their profiles are verified?

The answer: LinkedIn makes a ton of money selling InMails to people without verified profiles. And thus makes money off questionable businesspeople and outright scammers.

Instead of locking down the platform and preventing scammers from joining the platform in the first place.

It’s like LinkedIn openly embraces scammers.

And everyone knows it.

Imagen 4.

Some NPE’s Watching Me

(Imagen 4)

Unless you’re in the surveillance industry, surveillance sounds like a dirty word. I once knew an identity/biometric CEO who forcefully declared that HIS company would NEVER work in the surveillance industry.

Imagen 4.

But as Goddard Technologies notes, surveillance can be useful even if you’re NOT chasing bad people.

But before I describe how, I’m going to reveal my age.

Kennedy (John) William (Smokey) Gordy

Let’s talk about a singer who went by the name Rockwell. This was supposedly to conceal the fact that his last name was Gordy (he is Berry’s son). But he didn’t really conceal the fact that one of the uncredited backup vocalists on his wonderful one hit was a man named Michael Jackson. This was in the 1980s, when Michael Jackson was kinda sorta popular. OK, now do you remember the song?

“Somebody’s Watching Me” by Rockwell.

This excerpt from the lyrics provides the sinister tone of the song:

People call me on the phone, I’m trying to avoid
But can the people on TV see me, or am I just paranoid?

But that was the 1980s, when there was always a person in the surveillance loop. Even if there was a video camera hidden in Rockwell’s shower, some person was looking at the feed.

Things have changed.

Goddard Technologies’ “The Rise of Robotic Observers”

Now non-person entities (NPEs) are no longer the stuff of science fiction, and they can do things that only humans could do 40 years ago.

Sandra Krombacher shared one example from a LinkedIn article by Jon Kaplan of Goddard Technologies.

Kaplan’s theme:

“While much of the attention has gone to robots that do something (cleaning, welding, lifting), there’s a quieter, equally important shift happening: the rise of robots that observe.”

But what do they observe?

“These robots navigate environments, gather data, and report back. Think of them as mobile sensors with wheels, legs or propellers that identify open doors, check for damage, verify inventory, or confirm environmental conditions.”

Kaplan then notes that there are human beings that perform similar tasks, and that therefore these observer bots “align with how many industrial jobs actually work.” After the observations are collected, then humans—or perhaps other bots—can act upon the observations.

Does this affect how you perceive non-person entities? How do you feel about non-person entities that merely collect data for others to act? This is technically “surveillance,” but it could potentially reduce costs, increase profits, or even save lives.

Do you sell robotic observers, or something equally important?

Jon Kaplan used a LinkedIn article to tell his story about Goddard Technologies’ activities with observing robots.

But maybe your firm has your own story to tell.

Imagen 4. And I have to give credit where credit is due. I asked Google Gemini to create a picture with a wildebeest-authored LinkedIn article, but the article title, “The Grass Ceiling: Overcoming Obstacles in the Corporate Savana” (sic), didn’t come from me but from Google.

Why haven’t you written a LinkedIn article about your product? This lets you reach B2B prospects who are more likely on LinkedIn than on TikTok. In fact, I wrote a LinkedIn article about LinkedIn articles. (I wrote it so long ago that I only asked my clients six questions rather than seven questions.) And I’ve also written LinkedIn articles for Bredemarket clients.

Do you need help in writing that LinkedIn article that tells the world about your product? Maybe you could become one of my clients, since I help create content for tech marketers. Contact me.

Stop losing prospects! Use Bredemarket content for tech marketers
Content For Tech Marketers (July 3, 2025)Download

Working With Your Customers on Case Studies

On Tuesday I published a LinkedIn article as part of Bredemarket’s “The Wildebeest Speaks” series. The title: “Does Word-of-Mouth Eliminate the Need for Bredemarket?“

Once I answered that question (I think you can guess my answer), I talked about how you can effectively combine word-of-mouth and corporate efforts via “casetimonials“—either case studies or testimonials that allow the happy customer to have their say, while your company helps to shape the message.

Focusing on case studies, I said the following:

Case studies require more collaboration, as I found out when I wrote a dozen case studies for a firm.

So yes, much has changed over the last few years, but the need for you to communicate with your prospects remains.

Which is why you should solicit Bredemarket’s assistance. I can help create content for tech marketers. Contact me.

Stop losing prospects! Use Bredemarket content for tech marketers
Content for tech marketers.

On Communities

My written content usually targets a PRIMARY channel:

This content has a new target: my Substack “subscriber chat” https://open.substack.com/pub/johnebredehoft/chat

Because unlike the others, Substack subscriber chat is DESIGNED as a community.

A community that I’m not currently utilizing, but one that I should in the future.

By the way, if you want to read my Substack, visit https://substack.com/@johnebredehoft

Let’s Talk About Your LinkedIn Content

Does your LinkedIn content look like this?

Empty.

Fix that, before your competitors steal your rightful revenue.

Schedule a meeting with Bredemarket to discuss your needs at https://bredemarket.com/cpa/.

And if you want to see Bredemarket’s LinkedIn content, visit:

(Imagen 4)

Bredemarket Needs an Influencer…So I Created My Own

Remember last month when I created the Meta AI character N. P. E. Bredemarket? “He” identifies as “wisdom in technology, at your service.” Although I need to train him more, he is fairly good at illuminating technology topics.

N. P. E. Bredemarket.

But he doesn’t make me money.

To make money, I need an influencer to promote Bredemarket.

  • But not a macro-influencer like a Kardashian or Jenner.
  • And not a micro-influencer.

I created a second Meta AI non-person entity. This one, named JaneCPAInfluencer.

JaneCPAInfluencer, created by Instagram.

“She” is still in anti-hallucination training; at one point she said that I was the past president of the International Biometric Association (whatever that is). But she’s getting better.

Will she drum up business for Bredemarket? Probably not, since my Instagram influence pales in comparison to my Facebook and LinkedIn influence. But I’m curious to try it.

How to Find LinkedIn’s “Most Recent” Feed

It was Sunday afternoon, and I was reading my LinkedIn feed. (Yes, I know; the first step is admitting you have a problem.)

Except that I was seeing stuff that was weeks old. Posts about “upcoming” trade shows that already took place. News about the “upcoming” Prism Project deepfake report that was released long ago.

I don’t know why LinkedIn’s algorithm thinks I need to read ancient history. What’s next…reports that Enron may be a fraud?

The chronological feed

So I decided to bypass the algorithm and access the tried and true chronological feed. You know, the way things used to work before we supposedly got “smart.”

(As an aside, I remember when FriendFeed would AUTOMATICALLY update the chronological feed when new content was posted. The way that the pitchforks were raised, you would have thought the world ended. As it turned out, the world wouldn’t end until August 10, 2009…or April 10, 2015. But I digress.)

Anyway, I went to the feed to look for the switch to swap to chronological…but could find no such switch.

So I checked Google Gemini, and discovered that the “Most Recent” feed switch was buried in the Settings. For mobile LinkedIn users, it was in the “Account preferences” section, in the “Feed preferences.”

Except that it wasn’t.

Whack a Mole

“Feed preferences” only governed display or non-display of political content. The option below “Feed preferences,” “Preferred feed view,” was the one I wanted.

Preferred feed view.

Color me conspiratorial, but I think everyone in the Really Big Bunch—Microsoft (LinkedIn), Meta (Facebook), and the others—likes to play “Whack a Mole” with the location of the chronological feed setting so that we give up and stick with the algorithmic feed of The Things We Are Supposed To See.

So the instructions here, written on June 22, 2025, may be invalid on June 22, 2026. Or July 22, 2025. Or June 23, 2025.

But for this moment I have the chronological feed set on LinkedIn, and since it takes effort to change it back, I don’t know when I will.

Update

When I returned to LinkedIn to share a LinkedIn version of this post, my preferred feed view had been reset to “most relevant.”