Charlie Hills 🦩 and the AI-First Content Playbook

Charlie Hills 🦩's AI Content System (and Why It Scales)

I opened Charlie Hills 🦩's profile expecting the usual "AI tips" you see everywhere.

But then I saw the numbers: 188,660 followers, a Hero Score of 83.00, and a posting cadence of 11.3 posts per week.

That combo made me pause. Because high volume usually breaks quality. And high audience size usually drags engagement down. Yet Charlie's Hero Score says the opposite is happening.

So I pulled in two comparison creators with nearly the same Hero Score (both 82.00) - Kaliya Young and Dan Hockenmaier - to sanity-check what I was seeing.

Here's what stood out:

• Charlie doesn't "post a lot" - he ships systems people can save and reuse
• The writing is engineered for scanning (but still feels human)
• He treats AI like a workflow partner, not a gimmick, and that clarity cuts through the noise

---

Charlie Hills 🦩's Performance Metrics

Here's what's interesting: Charlie's profile looks like a creator business, but the content reads like a helpful operator sharing field notes. That blend tends to win on LinkedIn because it's both useful and trust-building.

And even though we don't have engagement rate data, the Hero Score (83.00) plus the consistency (over 11 posts/week) suggests his posts aren't just getting seen - they're getting interacted with at a rate that holds up as the audience grows.

Key Performance Indicators

Side-by-side snapshot (all three creators)

What surprised me is the distribution: Charlie's audience is massive compared to the others, but the Hero Score stays basically in the same "top tier" neighborhood. That usually only happens when the content is packaged in a way that scales.

---

What Makes Charlie Hills 🦩's Content Work

I noticed four things Charlie does that are simple to describe, but hard to copy unless you're disciplined.

1. He sells "saveable" structure, not vibes

So here's what he does: he takes a messy topic (AI for content is chaos right now) and turns it into checklists, phases, matrices, and prompts. The post becomes a tool.

And when a post is a tool, people don't just like it. They save it. They share it. They come back to it.

Key Insight: Turn advice into an object - a checklist, a 5-step workflow, a prompt pack, a "do this next" sequence.

This works because LinkedIn rewards behaviors that look like intent: saves, long reads, comments that reference the content. Structure increases all three.

Strategy Breakdown:

2. Cadence is high, but the posts are modular

Most creators hear "post more" and start rambling daily.

Charlie does something smarter: he posts often, but the content is built from modules that can be mixed and matched - hooks, micro-headings, short blocks, tight lists.

Also, note the given best posting time: 11:00. If you're shipping 11+ posts a week, timing becomes less of a superstition and more of a distribution habit.

Comparison table - consistency vs audience size

What this hints at (and yes, it's an opinion): Charlie has likely tested distribution enough that he trusts a system more than a single "perfect" post.

3. He teaches AI like a craft, not a shortcut

Want to know what surprised me?

His positioning isn't "AI will replace you." It's closer to: "You can use AI to produce clearer content, faster, without sounding generic." That "actually" in his headline matters.

He wins trust by naming the failure mode directly: generic outputs, recycled hooks, the same prompt everyone uses.

Comparison with Industry Standards:

4. He writes like a coach who respects your time

This is a big one.

The writing style is professional and instructional, but not stiff. It has a calm confidence: "Here's what works. Here's the fix. Do this." No fluff.

And it's intensely skimmable. Short lines. Clear dividers. Bold claims followed by steps.

Kaliya and Dan likely deliver value too, but their roles suggest different default content shapes:

• Kaliya's headline screams deep domain expertise (identity, governance). That often leads to thoughtful, niche discussions.
• Dan is a senior operator (CSO). That often leads to leadership lessons, market notes, and strategy takes.

Charlie, on the other hand, is optimized for "I can use this in 10 minutes." That matters.

Comparison table - positioning and content gravity

---

Their Content Formula

If you want to copy anything from Charlie, copy the shape. Not the topic.

The topic will change next year. The shape still works.

Content Structure Breakdown

The Hook Pattern

He tends to open with a punchy truth, a myth-bust, or a specific promise.

Template:

"Most people use AI for content the wrong way. Here's the fix in 5 steps."

More examples you can steal (and adapt):

• "If your AI writing sounds generic, you're skipping one step."
• "Stop treating AI like a shortcut. Use it like a system."

Why this works: it names a pain people already feel ("my posts sound like everyone else") and then promises a bounded solution ("5 steps"). No drama required.

The Body Structure

This is where the "saveable" part happens.

He doesn't wander. He stacks blocks that each do one job: frame, teach, apply.

Body Structure Analysis:

The CTA Approach

Charlie-style CTAs are direct and behavioral.

Psychology-wise, it's smart: the CTA is usually aligned with the post's value.

• If the post is a checklist - "Save this" makes sense.
• If the post is a strong take - a question invites comments.
• If it's a partial breakdown - a link to the full guide is natural.

And yes, it can feel repetitive.

But repetition is the point. You're training your audience to know what to do next.

---

What Charlie's approach teaches us (by contrast)

This is where comparing with Kaliya and Dan gets fun.

All three have strong Hero Scores. That means they each create real engagement relative to their audience.

But they likely earn it differently.

Kaliya Young: depth and authority in a niche

Kaliya's headline is dense (in a good way). It signals a multi-decade niche: self-sovereign identity, governance, convening.

That kind of positioning often wins with:

• event-driven spikes (conferences, panels)
• "field notes" posts after sessions
• relationship-based engagement (the right 50 people matter more than the biggest reach)

So even with 4,935 followers, an 82.00 Hero Score tells me her audience probably cares a lot when she speaks.

Dan Hockenmaier: operator credibility and strategic clarity

Dan's a CSO. That title alone changes how people read your posts.

Operator creators often win with:

• clear takes on markets and growth
• lessons from shipping, hiring, failing, and iterating
• "here's what I learned" narratives that feel earned

With 26,893 followers and an 82.00 Hero Score, Dan likely hits a sweet spot: big enough audience to spread, tight enough positioning to stay credible.

Charlie Hills 🦩: repeatable outcomes for a broad creator market

Charlie plays the widest market of the three (content + AI), which is risky because it's saturated.

But he makes it work by narrowing the promise:

• not "AI"
• not "content"
• but "actually use AI for content"

That word "actually" is doing a lot of work. It's a built-in filter.

Comparison table - what each creator is really selling

---

3 Actionable Strategies You Can Use Today

1. Turn one idea into a checklist - If your post can't become a saved reference, it probably won't travel far.

2. Write in modules, not essays - Short blocks, micro-headings, and lists make high frequency possible without burnout.

3. Add one constraint to every AI prompt - Tone, audience, example, or format. Constraints are what stop generic output.

---

Key Takeaways

1. Charlie wins with packaging - The "product" is a framework people can reuse.
2. High cadence works when posts are modular - Volume is only a problem when every post starts from zero.
3. Positioning beats topic - "Actually use AI" is tighter (and more credible) than "AI content tips".
4. Similar Hero Scores can come from different strategies - Kaliya's niche depth, Dan's operator credibility, Charlie's tactical systems.

If you try one thing this week, make it this: write a post that feels like a tool someone would save. Then watch what happens.

---

Meet the Creators

---

This analysis was generated by ViralBrain's AI content intelligence platform.