If you think that most of the posts you encounter on LinkedIn sound like the same corporate drone-generated slop, it’s because they are actually AI-generated. To combat that, LinkedIn users are getting a dedicated slop button so they can help mop up the mess being spewed across the internet.

“We are ramping the ability for members to tell us if they believe a post or comment seems like AI slop,” LinkedIn’s chief product officer Hari Srinivasan said in a post on the platform. “Slop is hard to define and the definition changes; this lets us tune our models and make better feeds.”

The new feature will allow users to click the three-dot menu in the upper-right corner of each post to select a button labeled “Seems like AI slop.” If a post is flagged as AI slop, the sharer will also be privately notified in their analytics dashboard.

The new feature comes as slop takes over not just LinkedIn but pretty much the entire social media ecosystem.  Srinivasan said that the LinkedIn team has already blocked billions of AI-generated posts and comments in just the last couple of months alone. Substack is also apparently having a big enough problem that CEO Chris Best announced earlier this month that it was integrating AI detection tool Pangram into its platform, in a post that fired open shots at LinkedIn and its subpar reputation.

“We built the ability to do a Pangram scan into the Substack app, because we’re sick of slop and we don’t want substack to turn into LinkedIn,” Best said in a chain of posts on X. “Platforms that reward fakeness will drive a race to the bottom. Pangram’s data shows that as much 40% of long-form text on LinkedIn is generated.”

According to Pangram’s data, which Best references, LinkedIn has the most long-form AI content out of all popular social media platforms that host long-form content.

“LinkedIn posts made up a third of scanned items, yet it accounted for nearly two-thirds (62%) of all AI content we flagged,” Pangram said in a blog post from earlier this month.

Srinivasan’s announcement on LinkedIn didn’t attack Substack openly the way Best’s did, but it did contain what appears to be a slight jab.

“We want members to get feedback from real humans on what sounds authentic – not just have an AI detector review it and get it wrong,” Srinivasan wrote.

People are increasingly relying on commercial AI detection tools to catch automation attempts, but these tools are not foolproof. They can produce false positives, and considering that many of these AI detection tools themselves are also run by AI, the reasoning that got the tool to its conclusion is obscured from the user, making it harder to decide when to trust the verdict.

But humans are also lackluster at discerning AI slop. A lot of the so-called telltale signs of AI-generated writing are just proper language rules (god forbid a writer likes using em dashes or colons!), and these detection tips and tools also often discriminate against non-native English speakers. Previous studies have characterized humans’ ability to identify AI-generated content as practically a coin toss.

On top of the “Seems like AI slop” button, Srinivasan also said that LinkedIn would be “ramping up a series of new and improved classifiers that identify if a post is AI-slop or generally low-quality content” and that the platform would be retiring its AI-driven “enhance your post” feature to replace it with an AI tool that proofreads but keeps your voice intact. Expect to see less slop in your LinkedIn feed, the executive promised.