candidates say they’d rather risk staying unemployed than talk to another robot
Fuck you, Fortune. They never said that. They say they skip AI interviews in favor of others. No jobseeker wants to stay unemployed. What a disgusting headline, what a horrible outlet.
I mean I did the same when I was applying for grad jobs… if they used HireVue then I’d just send an email withdrawing my candidacy and explaining why.
It’s just that they took the fact that people would rather spend a couple of extra months unemployed while jobhunting than engaging with shitty processes and systems, and didn’t specify that it’s only temporary unemployment. That’s pretty standard for a headline, they’re all clickbait by design, but this one definitely stays on the reasonable side.
the fact that people would rather spend a couple of extra months unemployed
That is not a fact, and the article does not bear that out either.
Jobseekers skip AI interviews in favor of real interviews. Nowhere does it say they’d rather twiddle their thumbs than conduct an AI interview.
The article goes into nuances, but ultimately it still sucks:
Job seekers and HR are starkly divided on how they feel about the tech, but one thing is fact—AI interviewers aren’t going anywhere.
What a false dichotomy.
“The truth is, if you want a job, you’re gonna go through this thing,” Adam Jackson, CEO and founder of Braintrust, a company that distributes AI interviewers, tells Fortune.
Well of course he’d say that.
This jobseeker puts it best:
“If I know from looking at company reviews or the hiring process that I will be using AI interviewing, I will just not waste my time, because I feel like it’s a cost-saving exercise more than anything,” Cobb tells Fortune. “It makes me feel like they don’t value my learning and development. It makes me question the culture of the company—are they going to cut jobs in the future because they’ve learned robots can already recruit people? What else will they outsource that to do?”
Various gross news companies ran headlines about Epstein et al. that used the phrasing “sex with underage women” rather than the more accurate phrase “raping children”
Fuck you, Fortune. They never said that. They say they skip AI interviews in favor of others. No jobseeker wants to stay unemployed. What a disgusting headline, what a horrible outlet.
I mean I did the same when I was applying for grad jobs… if they used HireVue then I’d just send an email withdrawing my candidacy and explaining why.
It’s just that they took the fact that people would rather spend a couple of extra months unemployed while jobhunting than engaging with shitty processes and systems, and didn’t specify that it’s only temporary unemployment. That’s pretty standard for a headline, they’re all clickbait by design, but this one definitely stays on the reasonable side.
That is not a fact, and the article does not bear that out either.
Jobseekers skip AI interviews in favor of real interviews. Nowhere does it say they’d rather twiddle their thumbs than conduct an AI interview.
The article goes into nuances, but ultimately it still sucks:
What a false dichotomy.
Well of course he’d say that.
This jobseeker puts it best:
“Job seekers would rather stay unemployed than interview with a company that has obvious red flags”.
This sounds a little better.
That’s right up there with calling Epsteins victims “underage women” instead of CHILDREN
bro wut
Various gross news companies ran headlines about Epstein et al. that used the phrasing “sex with underage women” rather than the more accurate phrase “raping children”
Ya i get that but one is so much worse that the comparison threw me off
yeah, they could have simply said “candidates would rather risk” but instead they made a false claim. poor work