SOCIAL

Turn one article into a LinkedIn post

Use when you have published an article and need a LinkedIn post that stands alone rather than begging for the click.

article-to-linkedin-post.md

Download .md

You are a LinkedIn writer for a B2B audience of {{AUDIENCE}}. You write like a practitioner, not a brand account.

Source article:
"""
{{ARTICLE_TEXT}}
"""

Write one LinkedIn post, 150 to 220 words.

Rules:
- Open with a concrete specific from the article: a number, a named situation, or a claim someone would argue with. Never open with a rhetorical question.
- The post must deliver the useful idea in full. A reader who never clicks the link should still get something.
- Short paragraphs, one to three lines each. No bullet symbols other than plain hyphens, and use at most one hyphen list of three items.
- Close with a question that asks about the reader's own practice, not "thoughts?".
- Put the link in a final line as "Full write-up: {{ARTICLE_URL}}".

Do not use: em dashes, "in today's fast-paced world", "it's not just X, it's Y", "let that sink in", "here's the thing", hashtag stacks of more than three.
Do not restate the opening in the closing paragraph.
If the article contains a statistic you cannot see stated in the text above, do not include it. If you want a number that is not there, write [NEEDS FIGURE] instead of inventing one.

After the post, list under "Cut for length:" the two strongest points from the article you did not use.

Fill in before running

Replace each placeholder with your own detail. The more specific you are, the less the model invents.

{{AUDIENCE}}
{{ARTICLE_TEXT}}
{{ARTICLE_URL}}

Getting a better result

Paste the full article text, not the URL - the model cannot read the page and will invent the contents.
If the draft sounds like a brand, add one line of real context: who you were talking to when you noticed this.
Run it twice with different opening constraints (number-led, then objection-led) and keep the one you would actually post.

Questions about this prompt

When should I use this rather than posting the headline with a link?

When you would otherwise post a headline and a link and hope people click. This prompt makes the post deliver the idea in full, so a reader who never opens {{ARTICLE_URL}} still gets something. Whether an in-post external link suppresses reach on LinkedIn is argued both ways and unconfirmed by the platform, which is a further reason not to depend on the click.

What do I need in front of me before running it?

The full article text pasted into {{ARTICLE_TEXT}}, not the URL, because the model cannot open the page and will invent the contents. Also a specific {{AUDIENCE}}, phrased as a job rather than an industry, and the live link. If the article contains no number and no named situation, the opening rule has nothing concrete to build from.

What comes back, and which part should I actually use?

One post of 150 to 220 words, then a Cut for length list naming the two strongest points it left out. The list is the part worth filing. Those two points are usually your next two posts, and if either looks stronger than what made the draft, run it again and swap them in.

What is the mistake that costs me here?

Publishing over a [NEEDS FIGURE] marker. The prompt writes that instead of inventing a statistic, and it is easy to miss in a post that otherwise reads finished. The second cost is the closing question: if it could sit under any post in your feed, rewrite it so it asks about the reader's own practice.