7,000 LinkedIn Messages: Pitching Data

I exported every LinkedIn message I have ever sent and received. Over 7,000 messages. Then I analyzed them.

In This Article

The Dataset
Finding 1: Language Matters More Than You Think
Finding 2: Wednesday Noon Is the Sweet Spot
Finding 3: Never Sell in Message One
Finding 4: Specific Beats Generic Every Time
Finding 5: The Anti-Targets
Finding 6: Connection Messages Are Almost Useless
What I Changed Based on This Data
The Bigger Lesson

Key Takeaway

The data from 7,000 LinkedIn messages reveals that short, personal messages without any business pitch in the first contact get 3x higher response rates. Spanish and Catalan messages outperformed English by 2x. The best time to message is Wednesday between 12 and 2 PM UTC.

Not for fun. Because I wanted to understand what actually works when reaching out to journalists, editors, and media professionals on LinkedIn. What gets responses? What gets ignored? What kills a conversation before it starts?

Here is what the data says.

The Dataset

To be specific about what we are working with:

7,061 messages sent and received across 3+ years
8,154 total connections at time of analysis
278 media professionals identified in connections (editors, journalists, reporters, correspondents)
Messages analyzed for: response rates, response speed, language patterns, timing, and conversation outcomes

This is not a survey where people self-report what they do. This is actual behavioral data from real conversations.

Finding 1: Language Matters More Than You Think

This was the biggest surprise. Our data showed a dramatic difference in response rates based on the language of the initial message.

Messages in Spanish or Catalan (to contacts in Spain and Latin America) had response rates between 51% and 57%.

Messages in English had a response rate of 26%.

That is roughly double the engagement when messaging in someone’s native language. And it makes intuitive sense. A message in your native language feels personal. A message in English, when you know the sender speaks your language, feels corporate.

The takeaway is not “only message in Spanish.” The takeaway is: if you share a native language with a journalist, use it. It is the simplest personalization you can do and it makes the biggest difference.

Finding 2: Wednesday Noon Is the Sweet Spot

Finding 3: Never Sell in Message One

This is the single most important tactical lesson from the data.

Messages that mentioned our agency, our services, or anything resembling a pitch in the first message had a response rate well below average.

Messages that offered something first (a compliment on their work, a relevant industry observation, or a useful resource) had response rates significantly above average.

The pattern in successful conversation threads:

Message 1: Value first. Comment on their work. Share a relevant insight. Ask a genuine question. Zero mention of what you do or want.
Message 2 (after they respond): Continue the conversation naturally. Show interest in their perspective.
Message 3+: Only now, if appropriate, mention that you work in a related space. And even then, frame it as sharing, not selling.

This is not a manipulation tactic. It is how normal human conversations work. You would not walk up to a stranger at a conference and immediately pitch your services. Yet that is exactly what 90% of LinkedIn outreach does.

Finding 4: Specific Beats Generic Every Time

We compared response rates between generic messages and specific ones. The difference was stark.

Message Type	Relative Response Rate
“I enjoyed your recent article about X” (specific)	High
“I like your content” (generic)	Low
“Your piece on [specific topic] raised an interesting point about [specific detail]”	Very High
“Great profile! Let’s connect”	Very Low

The more specific you are about what you have read and why it resonated, the more likely you are to get a response. This holds true across every category of contact — journalists, editors, PR professionals, brand marketers.

Finding 5: The Anti-Targets

Not everyone wants to hear from you. And that is fine. But the data helped us identify clear signals that someone should not be contacted:

Explicit opt-outs: 5 contacts in our data explicitly asked not to be contacted with pitches. These go on a permanent do-not-contact list.
Non-responders after 2 attempts: If someone has not responded to two different messages (spaced weeks apart and on different topics), they are not interested. Further messages are annoying, not persistent.
Hostile responders: A small number of contacts responded negatively. These are burned bridges. We flag them to avoid embarrassing repeat outreach.

This negative database is as valuable as the positive one. Knowing who not to contact saves time and protects your reputation.

Finding 6: Connection Messages Are Almost Useless

LinkedIn lets you add a short message when sending a connection request. We tested: personalized connection messages versus blank connection requests.

Surprisingly, the acceptance rates were similar. The personalized message made almost no difference at the connection stage. Where personalization matters enormously is the first message after connecting. That is where you either start a real conversation or get ignored.

Our approach now: send clean connection requests without agonizing over the message. Invest all the personalization effort into the first DM after they accept.

What I Changed Based on This Data

After the analysis, I rebuilt our entire LinkedIn outreach system:

Built a priority queue of media contacts ranked by relevance and recency of their published work
Created a “re-engage” list of past responders who went quiet but might be worth reconnecting with
Established timing rules: only send messages Tuesday through Thursday, late morning to early afternoon
Hard rule on first messages: offer value or say something specific. Never pitch. No exceptions.
Two-attempt maximum: if no response after two messages on different occasions, move on permanently
Language matching: always message in the contact’s native language if we share it

These changes, grounded in actual data rather than LinkedIn guru advice, are built into how we approach every journalist relationship.

The Bigger Lesson

LinkedIn is not a sales channel. It is not even really a networking channel. It is a relationship initiation channel.

The best outcomes from our LinkedIn outreach were not immediate placements. They were conversations that, weeks or months later, turned into “Hey, I am working on a story about X, do you have data on this?” messages from journalists who remembered the thoughtful person who commented on their work.

That is the long game. And the data confirms it works far better than any spray-and-pray outreach strategy.

Built on data, driven by relationships. That is how Presslei approaches every journalist interaction. Work with us.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the best way to pitch journalists on LinkedIn?

Never pitch in your first message. Start by adding value: comment on their recent work, share a relevant data point, or ask a genuine question about their coverage area. Save the pitch for the second or third interaction once you have established some rapport.

What response rate should I expect from LinkedIn outreach?

Generic connection requests with pitch messages get under 10 percent response rates. Personalized messages that reference the journalist’s recent work and offer value before asking for anything achieve 25 to 57 percent response rates depending on language and personalization level.

When is the best time to send LinkedIn messages to journalists?

Wednesday between 12 and 2 PM UTC consistently produces the highest engagement. Avoid Monday mornings (inbox overload) and Friday afternoons (winding down). Journalists are most receptive mid-week when they are actively working on stories.