Snap and LinkedIn are taking direct action against AI-generated spam flooding their platforms. Snap banned fully AI-generated videos from its Spotlight feed, the company's short-form video hub. Content creators can still use Snap's native AI editing tools, but uploads created entirely by generative AI systems face removal. The distinction matters: Snap wants to preserve human authorship while allowing AI as an enhancement tool.
LinkedIn launched a dedicated reporting mechanism for what users call "AI slop," low-quality, often repetitive AI-generated posts cluttering professional feeds. The button lets users flag content directly, giving the platform data on what its 900 million members consider spam. The term "AI slop" has entered common usage to describe generic, algorithmically-optimized posts that add no value but game engagement metrics.
Both platforms face the same problem. Generative AI makes content production nearly free, so bad actors flood feeds with mass-generated posts designed to capture attention or harvest engagement data. The content itself often lacks originality, nuance, or real information. Users see the same recycled ideas repeatedly, degrading feed quality.
Snap's approach is stricter but creates a gray area. How does the company distinguish between AI-generated videos and human-made ones? Detection tools exist but aren't foolproof. The policy effectively penalizes users who lean heavily on generative video creation while rewarding those who use AI as a finishing tool. This incentivizes human input as the primary creative force.
LinkedIn's reporting button shifts burden to users. Community flagging helps identify patterns, but it also relies on user judgment and willingness to engage with moderation. The platform likely combines reports with algorithmic signals to surface AI slop and reduce its reach.
Both moves signal that platforms now view AI-generated content flooding as a core product problem, not a minor issue. Feed quality directly impacts user retention and advertising