I’m trying to improve theCTR on myLink in bio and curious what’s actually worked forothers. I getclicks to the page, but not many people click through to the links. Doyou find it’s more about: fewer links? better design? clearerCTA?. Or does the tool itself even matter???
If this post doesn't follow the rules, please report it to the mods.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
I just think about how I use social. I maybe go to someone’s link in bio twice a year. People aren’t really looking to go off the platform, from what i understand. But it also depends on what you are trying to send people to.
The tool matters least. What moved it for me, in order:
Fewer links. Every link you add divides the clicks; a page with one link and one button gets more clicks on that link than a page with six gets in total. Put the thing you actually want this week at the top and move everything else below a fold.
The link text should finish the sentence the post started. If the video said "the template is in my bio", the button should say "Get the template", not the brand name or "Shop". Most bio pages are a menu; make it a continuation.
Match the top link to the last 3 posts. People land there because of one specific post. If the first thing they see is unrelated, they leave. I rotate the top link to whatever the current post is about, which is a 30 second job if you keep a note of what is scheduled.
Measure it from the platform side, not the bio tool. Instagram's own insights show website taps per post, and that tells you which posts send people who click versus posts that send people who bounce. Half of "low CTR" is really "the posts that drive profile visits are not the posts that promise anything".
Design is a distant fifth. A plain page with the right one link beats a pretty page with eight.
AI image generation has improved dramatically over the past few years. What used to be a choice between a handful of tools is now a crowded market with specialized platforms targeting different use cases. If you're considering a paid subscription, choosing the right tool can save both money and time. After researching and testing the major platforms, here's a breakdown of where each one excels. **1. Midjourney** *Best for*: Artists, creatives, and anyone prioritizing image quality. *Pros* * Industry-leading aesthetics * Exceptional lighting and composition * Great for concept art and cinematic visuals * Strong community and prompt resources *Cons* * Limited design-oriented workflows * Text generation still trails specialized tools * Less control compared to some competitors *Buy if:* Your main goal is creating visually stunning images that stand out. **2. Flux** *Best for*: Realistic image generation and prompt accuracy. *Pros* * Excellent prompt adherence * Strong photorealistic outputs * Growing ecosystem of integrations * Flexible deployment options *Cons* * Results can vary depending on the platform hosting it * Fewer beginner-friendly resources *Buy if:* You need realistic images and want the AI to follow prompts closely. **3. Ideogram** *Best for*: Marketing creatives and images containing text. *Pros* * Outstanding text rendering * Great for social media ads * Strong typography handling * Easy-to-use interface *Cons* * Artistic outputs aren't always as impressive as Midjourney * More focused on commercial design use cases *Buy if:* You frequently create ads, banners, thumbnails, or social content. **4. Recraft** *Best for:* Logos, branding, and vector graphics. *Pros* * Excellent vector generation * Strong branding workflows * Great for icons and illustrations * Useful for startup and agency work *Cons* * Not designed for photorealistic images * Smaller community compared to larger platforms *Buy if:* You need brand assets rather than artistic images. **5. Leonardo AI** *Best for:* Marketers, creators, and game asset production. *Pros* * Large collection of models * Useful templates and presets * Good balance between quality and usability * Strong editing tools *Cons* * Credit-based pricing may not suit heavy users * Can feel overwhelming initially *Buy if:* You want an all-in-one platform with lots of creative options. **6. Adobe Firefly** *Best for:* Businesses and Adobe users. *Pros* * Integrated with Adobe ecosystem * Commercial-friendly approach * Easy workflow for existing Adobe users * Strong editing features *Cons* * Creative outputs can feel less distinctive * Subscription costs add up if you're already paying for Adobe products *Buy if:* You already use Photoshop, Illustrator, or other Adobe tools. **Quick Recommendations** **Best Overall Image Quality** 🥇 Midjourney **Best Realistic Images** 🥇 Flux **Best for Marketing Creatives** 🥇 Ideogram **Best for Branding & Logos** 🥇 Recraft **Best All-Around Platform** 🥇 Leonardo AI **Best for Businesses** 🥇 Adobe Firefly If you're currently paying for an AI image generator, I'd love to hear your experience. * Which tool do you use most? * Which subscription gives the best value for money? * Have you switched platforms recently? * Which tool would you recommend to someone buying their first AI image generator? Looking forward to hearing real-world feedback from people who use these tools regularly.
A lot of marketers are still making content for the version of social media that existed 4 years ago. Polished graphics. Perfect branding. Overplanned content calendars. Safe hooks. And then they wonder why nobody watches. Meanwhile the creators growing fastest are filming in their car, reacting to something they saw 10 minutes ago, and pulling 500k+ views with barely any editing. The gap between “professional looking” content and effective content has never been bigger. One thing that completely changed how I approach content was studying creators that are actively breaking through not the already famous ones with massive built in audiences. And once you start analyzing enough breakout posts, certain patterns become painfully obvious. Most viral content feels immediate. Not overproduced. Not corporate. Not “approved by 4 people in Slack.” Immediate. It feels like a real opinion, a real reaction, a real observation, a real emotion. That’s why reaction style content works so well right now. A contractor reacting to bad renovation videos. A fitness coach reacting to terrible workout advice. A marketer reacting to cringe ad campaigns. People don’t just want information anymore. They want perspective. Another thing I’ve noticed: most creators waste energy trying to be everywhere at once. TikTok. Reels. YouTube Shorts. LinkedIn. X. And they end up building nothing anywhere. The creators growing fastest usually dominate one format first. Because every platform rewards people who deeply understand pacing, hooks, audience behavior, and native style. You don’t learn that by spreading yourself thin. Also, almost nobody has a content creation problem anymore. They have a research problem. There’s already an insane amount of winning content patterns out there. The problem is most people study random viral posts, copy huge creators too late, chase trends after they peak, and miss why something actually worked. The fix is boring but it works: track creators suddenly blowing up, spot hooks repeating across platforms, notice formats migrating from TikTok to Reels to Shorts, and catch content styles gaining momentum before saturation. I’ve been using SHunt for exactly this. Not for inspiration just to see what’s gaining traction before it peaks. Once you see enough breakout content, you realize virality is way more pattern based than most people think.
I've just watched this docu 'Louis Theroux: Inside the Manosphere' on Netflix that dived into a truly dark corner of the internet a.k.a *the manosphere.* It is honestly shocking to see how social media has let men with deeply misogynistic, oppressive views build such massive platforms. Plus, a lot of these creators have audiences made up of minors. Do we need stricter age restrictions on social media to protect younger users? This is genuinely corruption. How might this affect the next generation of men? And more importantly, how do we push back against it?
Hey guys! I’m an intern at a sports venue booking company, and I’m working on improving our social media strategy. What actually works to get good organic reach and engagement? Should we focus on reels, memes, sports content, or something else? Would love to hear from people in marketing or anyone who’s grown a brand on social media. Any tips or examples would be appreciated! 🙌
In January 2024 Zuckerberg gave written testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee. Among the safety tools helisted: "Parental supervision tools, which let teens ortheir parents set daily limits for thetotal timethat teens can spend on Instagram, Facebook, Messenger, Quest, and Horizon. Something families ould choose toturn on. On 25 August 2025 Meta settled the case brought by state attorneys general, eight days intothetrial in Dakland. The judge approved it and entered it as a final judgment the sameday. The agreement requires Meta to set every 13 to 17 year old to a default limit of two hours a day acrass its apps, plus a block from midnight to dam. Only a parent can loosen it. Sothetool hedescribed is now mandatory, and the person who can switch it off is the parent, not theteen. Meta built thetool. The settlement takes away the choice of whetherto use it. What it is not. It is not a confession. The judgment says in terms that Meta denies the allegations and any liability, and the judge approved it "without the final adjudication of issues of fact and law" Nobody found that Instagram harms teenagers. Companies settle mid-trial all thetime. What the documents say that the coverage doesn't. Threethings we only found by reading the agreement itself: 1. About $5bn of the money depends on Meta's rivals. Roughly 70% is guaranteed (ten payments of $1,165,662,174.55). The otherten payments of $502,402,600.77 are only made if rival platforms adopt equivalent limits. If they never do, the agreement says that money \*shall be permanently forfeited by such Settling State and retained by Meta." The strictest rules (one hour perapp, night block from 10pm alsoonly switch on under that condition. Meta now has a financial reason to want its competitors bound by the same rules. 2. Meta's announcement names two companies. The agreement names three, Meta's post says the contingent money is released when YouTube and TikTok adopt the limits. The agreement it sigried says Snap, TikTok and YouTube, all three, and the ones with annual profits over $10bn also have to pay an equal amount. 3. The totals don't match. Headlines say $16.7b, $17 1b, $18bn. The agreement's own payment table adds up to about $16.68bn across every installment, before a separate 75m for the states oosts and 459m to close some older privacy cases. Meta's own past says \*approximately $18 billion." We couldn't find in the documents what acounts for the difference. We filed it as "routine", not a gotcha. Nothing was hidden; the default moved and the denial didn't. It's here because in twayears, when someone asks whether the limits were Meta's idea, the testimony and the court order are bath dated. Source, with links to the Senate testimony, the signed judgment and the full agreement (hosted by the NJ and NY attorneys general) https://www.insidethesuits.com/receipts/13-zuckerberg-teen-time-limits/
Been writing ads for home improvement contractors for a few years now, roofing, siding, decking, painting, masonry, that whole world. Most of my clients are in Massachusetts (Cape Cod, the South Shore, Metro West, the Boston area, even Martha's Vineyard). For a long time you could grab some decent b-roll/stock footage, put a clean voiceover on top, and it'd pull leads no problem. Lately that exact formula is just… dying. CTR drops, cost per lead creeps up, people scroll right past. Feels like the audience got wise to the polished but generic look and now it reads as an ad instantly. So a couple of things I'd love your take on: what's actually working for these trades right now? Raw phone footage, owner-on-camera, before/afters, UGC, text-heavy statics? What's holding up and what's already burnt out? when you hear "roofing," "new siding," or "we should repaint the house," what actually goes through your head? What makes you stop on an ad vs. tune it out? And what would make you trust *one* contractor over the ten others clogging your feed? Genuinely just trying to get out of my own copywriter bubble. Appreciate any honest takes. Thanks!