[Research 001 · Free · Public sources only]
How LinkedIn's VP of Content posts on LinkedIn.
57 public feed items from Daniel Roth — VP of Content and Editor in Chief at LinkedIn — between June 9 and September 9, 2026. Solo posts, collaborative posts and reposts, by type, by format, and by what actually travelled.
[Enter your email and the PDF downloads right away]
Three findings before you download.
One post
carried the whole feed
A single outlier changed the shape of “what works.” Remove it and the strategy looks completely different.
Most of the feed
is not solo writing
The Editor in Chief of LinkedIn spends most of his time amplifying other people, not publishing original posts.
The metric you pick
decides which post wins
One standout post drew far fewer reactions but pulled an unusual number of comments. The story changes depending on what you count.
What's inside the study.
- →The full split of 57 activities — solo posts, collaborative posts, and reposts.
- →Format mix by activity type — video, text, images, articles, and links.
- →Posting cadence by month, weekday, and hour.
- →Topic map across creators, leadership, AI, business, and education.
- →Reaction and comment tables for the standout posts.
- →A 30-day test plan for your own team, plus the full method and every source post linked.
Questions people ask.
- Who is Daniel Roth?
- Daniel Roth is VP of Content and Editor in Chief at LinkedIn. This study looks only at his public LinkedIn feed between June 9 and September 9, 2026.
- How often does LinkedIn's VP of Content post?
- Across the 93-day window he averaged about 1.7 solo posts per week, 3.0 per week counting collaborative posts, and 4.3 per week counting simple reposts. The 57 feed items appeared across 34 days.
- What formats does he use most?
- Video leads: 22 of 57 activities (39%) were video. His 23 solo posts break down as nine videos, seven text posts, four images, two article or newsletter cards and one external link.
- What days and times did he post?
- 14 of 23 solo posts fell on a Tuesday or Thursday, and 21 of 23 were published between 09:00 and 16:59 New York time. That describes his schedule; it does not prove those slots perform better.
- How much engagement does he get?
- The median solo post drew 76 reactions; the mean was 244. A single Chris Paul interview video pulled 2,959 reactions — 53% of all solo-post reactions in the snapshot.
- Is the study free?
- Yes. Enter your email and the PDF downloads immediately. It uses public sources only and every post in the source list links back to the original.
Daniel Roth runs editorial at LinkedIn. Few people have seen more data about what the feed rewards, which makes his own posting behaviour worth reading closely — not as a formula to copy line for line, but as evidence of what an informed publisher chooses to do.
This study collects his public posts across the observation window and looks for the repeatable decisions underneath them.
What's inside
- A breakdown of post types: commentary, curation, company news, and personal reflection.
- How often he publishes, and what happens to reach when the cadence breaks.
- Structural patterns: opening lines, post length, links, and how comments are handled.
- The themes he returns to, and the ones he avoids entirely.
- What transfers to a founder with a smaller audience — and what does not.
Why one person's feed is worth a study
Advice about LinkedIn is abundant and mostly untestable. Observed behaviour is different: it shows what someone with unusual visibility into the platform believes is worth their limited time. When the same structural choice appears across dozens of posts, it is a decision, not an accident.
The honest caveat is audience size. A large following changes distribution from the first minute, so engagement numbers here cannot be used as a target. Structure, frequency, and topic discipline are the parts that scale down.
Takeaways for founders
- Pick a small number of themes and return to them until people associate your name with them.
- Write openings that state the point rather than tease it.
- Comment on other people's work as often as you publish your own.
- Publish on a rhythm that survives a hard week — consistency beats intensity.
- Use your own experience as the evidence. Second-hand takes travel poorly.
Method
All posts were collected from the public profile during the stated window and categorised by hand. Engagement counts reflect the moment of collection. Posts that were edited or deleted after publication are noted where we could detect it. Nothing in the study comes from private or platform-internal data, and no inference is made about LinkedIn's ranking system beyond what the public posts show.
[Questions people ask]
Is this affiliated with LinkedIn or Daniel Roth?
No. It is an independent study built from public posts, published by Invisible Keyboard.
Is it free?
Yes, the PDF is sent to your inbox at no cost.
Will copying these patterns grow my audience?
Structure helps, but reach here is driven by an audience built over years. Treat the study as a guide to decisions, not a guarantee of numbers.
Can I quote it?
Yes, with attribution to Invisible Keyboard and a link to this page.
[Our product · Invisible Whitepaper]
Want a white paper like this?
Invisible Whitepaper turns what your team already knows into a research-grade report — structured, designed, and ready to hand to buyers. Same system we used for the report above.
- Your data and expertise, turned into a defensible point of view.
- Written, edited, and designed end to end — you review, we ship.
- Built to be quoted: gated downloads, posts, and follow-up content included.