Why I stopped advertising on social media and what the alternatives are
🇬🇧 For the English version of this blog, read below. 🇳🇱 For the Dutch version, click here.
🌐 For other languages of this blog, click your flag below.
——–
Since 2009, I have run my own business. Over the past years, I have learned a lot about visibility, positioning, content creation, and reaching the right audience. Like many entrepreneurs and experts, at one point I seriously looked into paid advertising on social media, especially on LinkedIn and Twitter, because at first glance these platforms seemed logical for anyone targeting executives, managers, policymakers, large organizations, governments, and other high-level professionals.
The promise sounds attractive. Anyone willing to pay should be able to become visible faster to exactly the right people. Anyone offering valuable knowledge, expertise, and solutions should be able to get in front of potential clients and cooperation partners more quickly through advertising. In theory, that is a convincing story. In practice, it proved to be much less credible for me.
After my experiences with LinkedIn and Twitter Ads, I came to a clear conclusion: paid advertising on social media often costs a lot of money, does not always deliver relevant quality, and in my case contributes hardly at all to sustainable visibility or real growth. For me, growing organically and creating content myself works better than advertising.
The logic behind my choice of LinkedIn- and Twitter Ads
LinkedIn and Twitter initially seemed like the most logical advertising platforms. My work revolves around social innovation, Singularity (2029+), strategy, policy development, innovation management, AI, blockchain, Web3, data analysis, and organizational transformation. These are not topics for fast entertainment content, but for policy-driven, strategic, and future-oriented conversations. That is exactly why LinkedIn and Twitter seemed like logical channels.
My goal was also not vague or general. I was not looking for a large mass of random views. I wanted to be visible to the right people: decision-makers, policy leaders, strategists, executives, and other professionals within larger organizations. Not superficial attention, but relevant attention. Not empty clicks, but serious interest. Not fleeting impressions, but substantive alignment.
That distinction is essential. Many advertising platforms sell reach as if reach alone is already valuable. But reach without relevance is often just an expensive form of noise.
What the numbers seemed to say, and what practice showed
In platform reports, I saw various metrics after advertising, such as impressions, clicks, and engagement rates. On paper, it appeared that there was movement. A post had reach. A campaign showed interaction. There seemed to be a certain dynamic developing. But once I looked at what was actually happening outside the platform, the picture became much less convincing.
I saw little clear increase in relevant website visitors, no demonstrable growth in quality conversations, and only a limited rise in relevant responses, valuable followers, or concrete requests. So there was a statistical story within the advertising platform, but it did not translate into tangible results outside it.
That is exactly where the core of the problem lies. Social media platforms report according to their own terms and definitions. That does not automatically make the numbers wrong, but it does limit their meaning. A high engagement rate is not automatically proof of real interest. A click is not automatically a visitor who reads your website, understands your vision, or wants to buy your service. Engagement on its own is also a weak measure of real business impact, because people can consume content passively without visibly responding.
Why Ads work too limitedly in my situation
Over time, it became clear that for example LinkedIn Ads has too many limitations for my purpose. I want to reach large organizations, banks, and governments. But in practice, many freelancers, small entrepreneurs, and people with a loose or indirect connection to my subject also ended up on my profile or in my ads.
That is less strange than it seems. LinkedIn works with fixed audience categories and aggregated profile data. A job title such as CEO, director, or manager sounds relevant on paper, but in reality it does not say enough. A CEO may be the director of a large company, but also of a one-person business with no staff. A manager may be formally connected to a large organization, but only temporarily hired there on a project basis. Someone may work as a self-employed contractor for a ministry, a bank, or a multinational and therefore seem relevant in context, while that person is not the decision-maker, buyer, or structural stakeholder you actually want to reach.
That creates a structural problem: apparently suitable profiles turn out in practice not to be the right audience. The ad may reach someone with a relevant title, but not necessarily someone in a relevant position. For an entrepreneur or expert who works with substantive, strategic, or governance-related services, that is a fundamental limitation. Once the recipient’s context is not right, the value of the reach drops significantly.
There is also something else. The targeting options in ads often sound more advanced than they really are. In theory, you can segment a lot, or so it is often described in online manuals and communicated by social media platforms. In practice, however, you work with fairly broad categories, limited combinations, and profile data that does not always make enough distinction between permanent roles, temporary assignments, side roles, and self-employed work structures. For example, something like selecting company size for your LinkedIn ad is not possible. As a result, you quickly pay for visibility among people who may look professionally interesting, but are not commercially relevant enough.
The difference between platform success and real results
What struck me most is how easily platform numbers can create a distorted picture. A post can show a decent engagement rate, while the actual business outcome remains weak. That is partly because platforms may include not only external link clicks, but also internal interactions in their definition of engagement. Think of opening a post, clicking “read more,” viewing a profile, or other actions that take place inside the platform itself.
This creates a situation in which an ad seems active internally, but has hardly any external effect. For many advertisers, that is a crucial difference. Because ultimately the question is not how much activity a platform records, but how much real value comes from it. Do people become visitors, readers, contacts, followers, clients, partners, or ambassadors? Or do they remain stuck in a superficial click without follow-up?
That is not only a technical point, but a strategic one. Anyone who relies only on impressions and engagement rates risks confusing marketing performance with business performance. That is exactly why it is necessary to measure ads against multiple benchmarks: website visitors, time spent reading, conversion, contact requests, returning traffic, substantive responses, and ultimately concrete collaboration or assignment value.
Why organic content works better for me
Because of that contrast, I have come to value organic content more. Organic reach does not cost advertising budget. It does require time, attention, consistency, and substantive quality. But that is exactly where its strength lies.
Organic content builds something that advertising can buy much less easily: trust. When someone consistently shares their own insights, they do not only show what they do, but also how they think, how they approach problems, and what vision underlies that. That creates recognition and credibility. People then follow not because the content was bought, but because they recognize something valuable in the substance.
For my work, that is essential. My subjects are complex, strategic, and future-oriented. These are not topics you can convincingly communicate with a few paid lines and a limited ad format. Such topics require context, nuance, and intellectual credibility. People need time to follow a line of thought, weigh a vision, and see where real expertise lies. Organic content provides that space.
That is why I also see more value in organic posts in practice. Not because every post goes viral, but because the interaction is often more genuine. The people who respond, follow, or keep reading often do so out of substantive interest. That makes the relationship more valuable and more sustainable.
Why followers and likes say little on their own
One of the big misconceptions on social media is that numbers automatically say something about quality. Many likes, many views, or many followers can seem impressive, but without context those numbers say little about authenticity, influence, or conversion power.
Follower and like counts also say little on their own, because in practice these numbers on social media are not always reliable and can even be artificially influenced. There are all kinds of ways in which followers are bought or inflated, which means that especially when selecting influencers, one should look critically at authenticity, relevance, and the quality of the audience.
That does not only apply to influencers, but also to organizations and experts who position themselves online. A large profile is not necessarily a strong profile. An account with fewer followers, but a credible voice, strong content, and relevant interaction can be much more valuable commercially than an account with high numbers and low substantive quality. For anyone working with thought leadership, expertise, or strategic advisory work, that is an important distinction.
The pressure of algorithms and the trap of quantity
Another pitfall is the constant pressure from algorithms and online advice suggesting that success mainly comes from posting more and more. Being visible every day, repeating constantly, publishing continuously, always staying present: it sounds like a growth strategy, but it can just as easily lead to content inflation.
It is also important not to let yourself be guided by algorithms that suggest you need to post a lot every day. In the end, it is about quality, sustainable online relationships, authority, and authenticity. Not quantity, and certainly not posting so much that it can come across as spam, especially toward key people and decision-makers.
Especially when the target audience consists of executives, policymakers, managers, and other key people, excessive visibility does not automatically work in your favor. On the contrary: posting too much without enough substantive value can come across as restless, opportunistic, or spam-like. Authority does not arise from volume alone. Authority arises when content, tone, timing, and consistency reinforce one another.
Authenticity also plays a crucial role in that. That does not simply mean “being personal,” but being substantively recognizable and credible. A profile becomes stronger when it shows a clear line of thinking, when expertise becomes visible in the quality of the argumentation, and when interaction is meaningful rather than forced. That takes time. But it is precisely that time that makes sustainable online relationships possible.
My experiences with Twitter/X, Facebook and TikTok
My conclusions are not limited to LinkedIn. Also on Twitter/X, as already mentioned above, and additionally on Facebook and TikTok, I see similar mechanisms at work. Each platform has its own culture, its own algorithmic logic, and its own ad formats, but the underlying promise is often the same: pay for visibility and you get reach faster.
In practice, that reach is rarely automatically valuable. Twitter/X can be fleeting and fragmented, causing deeper content to disappear quickly in the rhythm of the moment. Facebook can distribute broadly, but for highly specialized, professional propositions it is often less precise than it seems. TikTok can generate enormous reach, but viral visibility is often very short-lived and does not guarantee credibility, substantive alignment, or serious business interest.
In addition, advertising on these platforms can be not only financially costly, but also strategically burdensome. You need to test, adjust, re-segment, analyze, fine-tune, and invest again. Meanwhile, it remains uncertain whether the visibility you are buying actually matches the people you want to reach. Anyone working from substance, strategy, and expertise can easily end up in a process that takes a lot of energy and delivers relatively little sustainable value.
What this experience taught me
The most important lesson is that visibility is not the same as impact. Paid reach can create temporary volume, but that does not mean it also builds credibility, trust, or lasting interest. In fact, in my experience it often works the other way around for my profile. The more emphasis there is on paid distribution, the less visible the distinction becomes between genuine interest and platform activity.
Organic content requires more patience, but it creates a stronger foundation. It makes it possible to build a personal voice, develop a substantive reputation, and become visible in a way that is not fully dependent on advertising budgets. It helps to build sustainable relationships instead of merely buying fleeting attention.
That does not mean that advertising is never useful. For some products, sectors, and objectives, it can certainly be effective. But for a profile that revolves around vision, strategic depth, substantive expertise, and sustainable positioning, I see more value in consistently building my own authority than in paying for short-lived visibility.
Concrete steps
A workable approach starts with temporarily putting paid campaigns on hold until the basics are in order. First, focus on organic content that clearly shows where the expertise lies, who it is intended for, and which problem it solves. Organic visibility then functions not as accidental reach, but as a selecting mechanism: the right people recognize themselves in the content, while irrelevant audiences drop off more quickly.
Then measure not only at platform level, but especially outside the platform. Look at website visitors, session duration, returning traffic, contact requests, responses from relevant professionals, and the quality of the interaction. That combination gives a more reliable picture of real impact than isolated likes or engagement percentages.
Also work with a limited but consistent content structure. For example, choose a few fixed content pillars such as vision, practical experience, analysis, and reflection, and publish only when there is truly something to say. That creates recognizability without visibility turning into noise or spam.
More impact without ads through SEO, AI and conversion optimization
There are also other ways to achieve better results without paid advertising, such as increasing the conversion rate, improving SEO, AIO, GEO, and AEO, and optimizing search terms, the customer journey, and the User Experience.
Increasing the conversion rate means getting more action from your visitors, such as a contact request, sign-up, or purchase. SEO means making your website more discoverable in search engines such as Google. AEO is about giving clear answers so that your content can appear more quickly as a direct answer. GEO focuses on visibility in generative AI systems such as ChatGPT or other AI search environments, while AIO is broader and concerns optimizing content and websites for AI in general. User experience is about how pleasant, clear, and easy your website is for visitors, but also about the “experience” they have: the impression or feeling your product or service evokes. Customer journey optimization means improving the entire route of a visitor: from first click, to reading, to building interest, to making contact, and eventually becoming a customer. By responding intelligently to search behavior, visitor questions, and the way people move through your website, you can get more out of the same online visibility. In that way you make better use of existing visitors and do not need to keep spending extra advertising budget. I will go into this in more detail in future blogs.
Main points
The main points are simple, but strategically important. Do not let yourself be misled by dashboards that show activity without that activity leading to readers, conversations, or assignments. A platform may suggest growth, while the business meaning remains limited.
Also look critically at visible popularity. Many followers, likes, or views can seem impressive, but they say little if the target audience is not right or the interaction is superficial. Relevance, credibility, and sustainable relationship building are ultimately more valuable than quick numbers.
Finally, quality remains more important than volume. Especially with a target audience of key people and decision-makers, a substantively strong, credible, and authentic profile works better than a profile that mainly posts a lot to satisfy the algorithm. Organic growth is slower, but often also stronger, more sustainable, and strategically more valuable.
In short: do not measure only visibility, but especially whether visibility also really leads to trust, interaction, and concrete results.
Conclusion
My conclusion is clear. In my situation, advertising on LinkedIn, X (formerly Twitter), Facebook, and TikTok is not effective enough to justify the investment. It requires significant financial resources and time, and in my experience it delivers too little genuine quality in return.
Growing organically and creating my own content is the better strategy for me. Not only because it requires no advertising budget, but especially because it aligns better with how trust, authority, and meaningful relevance are actually built. Not through superficial metrics alone, but through sustainable relationships, recognizable expertise, and authentic visibility.
Perhaps that is ultimately the most important lesson: not every platform fits every strategy, and not every form of visibility is worth the investment. Sometimes the smartest choice is not to pay more for reach, but to become consistently and increasingly visible through one’s own strengths.
Summary
Visual summary of the blog is attached below. Click on the image to enlarge. Sharing online is allowed, provided my website is credited: www.maryayaqin.com.
