I Had the Dream Job Everyone Wanted. Then My Peers and I Lost It All.


The golden era of the tech industry is dead -- leaving 1.2 million laid-off workers like me scrambling in a job market that no longer wants us.

Sign up for the Slatest to get the most insightful analysis, criticism, and advice out there, delivered to your inbox daily.

On Feb. 10, 2025, at 7:32 a.m., the dreaded email hit my inbox. After nearly six years at Meta as a content strategist, one total... company rebrand, and three previous mass layoffs, I got the axe. My time was bound to come. I often joked darkly that I was a cat with only so many lives left.

In six weeks, I was scheduled for a 30-day sabbatical. To add insult to injury: The company announced the layoffs were due to "low performance." Despite years of glowing performance reviews in which I received high praise from my peers and managers and the numerous messages of support from colleagues, it still felt like being kicked to the curb and being called a loser.

I went on the offensive and drafted the obligatory LinkedIn post announcing my layoff and saying how very disappointed I was, how I planned to recharge, and yes, I was looking for work, so wouldn't everyone pretty please keep me in mind for open roles?

Outwardly, I kept it rosy. Inwardly, I was fuming.

It was humiliating. This was a first for me, and I thought I'd seen it all (harassing a former boss to pay months of back wages while recovering from brain surgery only to be laid off anyway is a formative experience). I had more than a decade of experience in my field and a Big Tech pedigree that had reliably opened doors for me. I was confident I'd find work again -- I always had.

The 2010s and early 2020s were the golden era of tech -- aggressive hiring, generous salaries, and flowing perks defined the industry: gourmet meals, LASIK stipend, free therapy. The years since have been a never-ending bloodbath. More than 1.2 million people have been laid off in tech since 2022, according to TrueUp.Io. Because these are only the publicly reported layoffs, the number could be higher.

Recruiters used to message me weekly, sometimes daily, a few years ago. The options were copious, the outlook optimistic. After enduring so much job insecurity early on in my career, I thought I had made it. In the past year, though, I've applied to at least 100 roles for which I was an excellent fit. I've secured referrals, used A.I. to customize my résumé and cover letter (which one survey shows is only overwhelming and slowing down hiring, so thanks for nothing, Gemini), openly shared on social media, and simply persisted.

I'm a journalist and writer by trade, so I've refocused on nurturing my craft. Last year, I wrote and published a children's book. I started pitching to publications again and picked up activities that proverbially filled my cup: I learned pottery, organized community events, fundraised for mutual aid, and started on neglected home projects -- I even finished some of them. Some days, I've entertained the idea of opening a business (laundromats are apparently low-risk, high-success ventures). But that requires more time and energy than I'm willing to sacrifice while raising a young child and entertaining my dreams of becoming a star potter.

But my job prospects have been bleak. I've interviewed for three full-time roles and one fixed-term contract role in more than a year. I've never felt so unemployable.

My story isn't unique. Tech workers across the industry are struggling to regain employment in their fields despite relentless searching, experiencing burnout on top of unemployment. People like me, once heavily recruited and flush with career choices, now can't catch a break. The applications go unanswered, the layoffs keep mounting, and we clamor over the few jobs left, wondering whether we've overstayed the party in Silicon Valley.

"I applied to hundreds of roles over several months. But the process was extremely slow and led nowhere," technical recruiter A. Kapadia, who asked that her full name not be disclosed, told me. Kapadia was laid off in March 2024 and has held two short-lived roles since, supporting herself through paid content creation and side jobs like dog-sitting. "As a recruiter, I know how competitive things are in this job market. Hundreds, if not thousands, of applicants for one job, and hiring has become slow. Knowing this made it so hard for me to stay optimistic."

Losing my cushy tech compensation package was obviously a huge hit. Gratefully, I live in a dual-income household where my spouse is gainfully employed and compensated well. But that's not the case for everyone, and some aren't yet ready to give up on the tech dream.

"I'm still applying mostly in tech," Liz Daley Khan told me. Daley Khan is a knowledge management professional and people manager who was laid off from Uber in March after nearly nine years. Daley Khan's wife was laid off from her own tech job in November 2025, and the two were dependent on Daley Khan's income and health insurance to pay for their home's mortgage, treat chronic health conditions, and care for a recently adopted cat.

"Totally shamelessly, it's where the money is," she said. "In order to not take a massive pay cut, I'm going to have to try to stay within tech. I don't have time to wallow any longer. With my wife and I both looking for jobs, every plan is Plan A. I'm applying to everything. Staying busy has helped keep the anxiety at bay, but the fear that our savings will run out is real."

Others, exhausted by the dead ends, have been forced to leave the industry altogether. Alyssa Galvan, a content strategist and editor who worked at Meta for more than seven years before being laid off, told me that between May 2023 and August 2024, she had just two job interviews.

"One was a phone interview with an agency contracted with Meta that offered me my previous job -- as a contractor for half the pay and no benefits. I declined it," she said. "The other was for a retail position at a local Kohl's, which ghosted me."

I, too, was recruited for my exact role at Meta by numerous staffing agencies for months. Like Galvan, it was for a fraction of the pay and without benefits. Galvan, whose husband was also unemployed after a tech layoff, eventually enrolled in graduate school and currently works part-time as a writing tutor and editor of various blogs and journals at San Jose State University.

"I wasn't having any success finding a job in the field I had spent 10 years in, and it was extremely demoralizing," she said. Pivoting was her "best chance at obtaining gainful employment," she added.

Historically, economic downturns are normal and are followed by periods of growth. And the U.S. job market overall is experiencing a slowdown, with hiring rates dropping to 3.1 percent, the lowest since April 2020, according to the February Job Openings and Labor Turnover report published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.

But the tech industry's stability has been waning for the last four years, and significantly trailed the rest of the U.S. labor market.

"Tech in particular has gone from adding 200,000 to 300,000 jobs per year to losing 10,000 to 50,000 jobs per year in one of the worst swings of any sector," Joseph Politano, founder of the Apricitas Economics newsletter, told me. "Some of the headlines can be overexaggerated, but this is genuinely the worst tech job market in decades, and if the hiring slump persists for another year, this downturn will be the longest on record."

What's particularly frustrating is that many CEOs admit they over-hired during COVID and are now cutting costs to improve "efficiency" and to ramp up A.I. infrastructure. Not only is A.I. a costly investment that companies hope will pay off by automating more jobs, but the layoffs are also occurring at a breathless rate. While I was writing this piece, Oracle slashed another 30,000 jobs on March 31.

Politano explained that the hiring rate isn't even close to offsetting A.I.-related job losses across the whole industry -- with many of the losses concentrated in companies that specialize in software that's "easily replicable" by large language models. "I don't think it's a coincidence that despite many macro factors working in tech's favor this year, hiring has only gotten worse," he said.

Coupled with sweeping return-to-office policies, people who were hired remotely or moved out of tech city centers like New York, Seattle, and San Francisco (hi, it's me, your average SF COVID-era expat) are in heated competition with one another. Nearly half of Americans who're actively looking for work report it's been a negative experience, with many saying they can't get an interview, according to recent Gallup polls.

It's obvious to job seekers and recruiters alike that there are far more applications per job opening, and still hiring managers feign shock when they turn me down for a job due to the overwhelming response.

A.I. is largely to blame, yet again, for this, according to Tiberiu Trandaburu, CEO and founder of tech staffing agency Uptalen. "By adding the use of it, recruiting teams are increasing their productivity, but it's leading to more noise due to the greater number of people in the process and causing over-filtering and missing out on good candidates who don't meet rigid criteria," Trandaburu told me.

I eventually landed a fixed-term contract role at another big tech company. I'm paid 25 percent less than I was for my job at Meta, with five annual PTO days and zero paid holidays, and I'm overqualified for the work I do. Nonetheless, I'm grateful to be employed -- and in the field I've invested so much of my career in. But I'm also exhausted. I feel like I'm trapped in a maze that keeps changing its configuration, and I dread the state of the job market when my contract ends in a few months.

Best-case scenario: It'll be a jobseeker's market again (soon), A.I. will really pan out to be a tech revolution, and we'll all live happily ever after ... but at what cost? Historic unemployment, lower quality of life and sunken morale among workers -- and it won't be without consequence.

What tech leaders fail to grasp is that as they reprioritize toward a technology that's positioned to displace more workers, they're sending a message: Profits trump all and workers are fat to trim, so, fall in line -- the golden era of tech is dead.

Forty-nine percent of the American workforce says they're struggling, according to Gallup, the first time it's outnumbered the percentage of folks who say they're thriving. And discontent can be contagious, ultimately having a ripple effect on worsening morale and productivity.

The U.S. job market is projected to add 5.2 million jobs through 2034. The health care and social assistance industries are expected to experience the largest job growth and be the fastest-growing industries, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Tech is playing a risky game of chicken with talent -- because they will find greener grass elsewhere. Workers may get the last word yet.

As for me, I'm not sure if I can wait around for tech to get its act together or the A.I. revolution that may or may not be. My pottery studio fee isn't going to pay for itself -- but maybe that laundromat will.
 
more
  • You are fortunate to work in big tech companies and earned money. There are many who did not get a single job for years, some not able to complete... even their degree. There are many who don't have access to drinking water , food and shelter. So you are very much blessed. You will have every options open to go for a better job than you had. This is life.  more

3   
  • The CEO is entitled to receiving all correspondences. His/her role doesnt involve mistakes hence their request to have them into all your... communication. If you enjoy your job, be open minded and forego minor requests that drain you. Learn their way of working to simplify the way you operate.  more

  • There is a difference between upward delegating, seeking guidance and informing. Informing is critical in creation of a positive and health work... environment. A CEO must be informed of all communication emanating from the organization. All communication with policy or operational effect must be brought to the attention of the leadership prior to dispatch. This way, the leadership is kept informed and creates room for seiving the message to confirm to company policy and operational philosophy or culture. Delighting upward on the other hand, borders insurbordination. You are literary passing your work to be done by your seniors. This is a direct breach of protocol. It should not be confused with communication and the verification requirement, which is a standard screening procedure. more

    2
  • Which job is more satisfying for you ? follow that job. money can be made through various other ways also. A stable job is needed at first and think... about some online business which can be done at any time online.. more

  • J M

    23h

    If employer doesn't need your services your departure is written on the wall. No matter if your salary or hourly. If your hourly in a union... environment termination has a process that is under the guidance of a contract. Ask yourself, do I like working here and why if you do and why not if you don't. This question will answer the how I get paid and how important it is. Best of luck to you. more

3   
  • Review your entire recruitment process to ensure your selection is not dependent on only a CV, references and an interview. Assess for motivation,... personality, ability, competencies etc. Secondly, conduct an objective assessment of this employee's performance including behavior. By objective, I mean consider everything and not a simple focus on his recent outbursts. He has proved he could do the job from your own account so something has happened to change that either voluntarily or involuntarily. Do you part and apply policy. I hope you have policies and procedures to guide and ensure your remain objective and compliant. All the best.  more

  • Review your entire recruitment process to ensure your selection is not dependent on only a CV, references and an interview. Assess for motivation,... personality, ability, competencies etc. Secondly, conduct an objective assessment of this employee's performance including behavior. By objective, I mean consider everything and not a simple focus on his recent outbursts. He has proved he could do the job from your own account so something has happened to change that either voluntarily or involuntarily. Do you part and apply policy. I hope you have policies and procedures to guide and ensure your remain objective and compliant. All the best.  more

2   
  • A nonchalant customer isn’t necessarily rude—they’re just indifferent, distracted, or not fully convinced yet. The worst thing you can do is match... their energy or push too hard. The goal is to stay calm, guide the conversation, and gently pull them in. more

  • Remember that these actions will cost you money.

Meta employees face a tough choice: hustle or hunt


Business Insider tells the global tech, finance, stock market, media, economy, lifestyle, real estate, AI and innovative stories you want to know.

When layoffs are looming, do you grind harder or dust off your résumé? Meta employees are now facing that thorny question after the tech giant said on Thursday it plans to eliminate about 10% of its workforce on May 20, acknowledging that... the announcement "puts everyone in an uneasy state" and leaves them "with nearly a month of ambiguity.

"The long notice period has created a peculiar kind of workplace limbo: Unlike the abrupt cuts that have become common in tech, Meta's warning gives employees time, but not clarity. "It freaks everybody out," former Netflix chief talent officer Patty McCord told Business Insider. Meta employees, including its top performers, likely feel unsettled because layoffs aren't necessarily about individuals' performance. Many are probably thinking to themselves, "this could be me," she said.

Meta said it outlined its layoff plans in an internal memo because the news had leaked. At that point, the company had little choice but to confirm it, said Libby Sartain, a former head of HR at Yahoo and Southwest Airlines.

"As we say here in Texas, the barn door is already open, and the horses are running," she said. When workers fear or anticipate layoffs, they often try to prove their value, yet doing so often doesn't make a difference, said Chikara Kennedy, a former senior HR manager at Meta and the CEO of a coaching and consulting firm.

"People come up with the most arbitrary projects and ideas," said Kennedy, who was impacted by Meta's 2023 layoffs round. Their goal is to "prove their worth because they're really trying to control the uncontrollable.

"That impulse is largely driven by fear, Kennedy said, as workers look for "some level of relief for the anxiety" and end up overextending in an effort to stand out. Yet in Meta's case, the individuals being let go have likely been identified due to the sweeping nature of the cuts, said Laszlo Bock, a former Google head of human resources who now advises startups.

"Working harder in the final weeks won't move the needle," he said. Instead, Bock said employees are often better off using the time to network and line up their next move.

"If you survive the cut, then you lose a few hours," he said. "If you don't, starting outreach before you're impacted gives you a leg up. "Workers shouldn't expect their boss to be much help, Bock said, as managers may also be at risk of getting a pink slip. "Most will be putting on their own oxygen masks before assisting others," he said.

While Meta is likely to be focused on preventing sabotage and retaining top performers during the limbo period, continuing to show up and do the job can still matter, said Ashley Herd, a cohost of the "HR Besties" podcast and a former head of human resources in North America at consulting firm McKinsey. It could help you get recommendations from higher-ups for your next stint.

"Others may notice your effort and advocate for you," said Herd. Disengaging is also a bad idea as it might give the company a reason to add to its layoff roster, said Sartain, the former Yahoo and Southwest Airlines HR exec.

"You for sure will be on the list if that occurs," she said.

Layoffs Tech

Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.

Meta will show parents the topics of their teens' AI conversationsFind the latest technology news and expert tech product reviews. Learn about the latest gadgets and consumer tech products for entertainment, gaming, lifestyle and more.

Read more "

Meta will let parents see children's chats with AI and intervene before risks spiralTech Product Reviews, How To, Best Ofs, deals and Advice

Read more "

Meta's bundling your Instagram and Facebook account settings in one placeMeta's combining the settings for your Instagram, Facebook, Messenger, and Meta accounts in the Accounts Center. This means you can access the settings for each account in one place.

Read more "

Meta plans to layoff 10% of its entire staff in MayBusiness Insider tells the global tech, finance, stock market, media, economy, lifestyle, real estate, AI and innovative stories you want to know.

Read more "

Meta says it will lay off 10% of its workforceRob Wile is a Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist covering breaking business stories for NBCNews.com.

Read more "

Meta to Lay Off 8,000 Employees Amid Tech's AI-Driven CutsThe Instagram and Facebook owner will also close 6,000 open job listings.

Read more "
 
more

I landed a job from a hack I found on Reddit


Business Insider tells the global tech, finance, stock market, media, economy, lifestyle, real estate, AI and innovative stories you want to know.

This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Courtney Clapper, a 32-year-old strategy lead for a major retailer in New York. It's been edited for length and clarity.

I started my job hunt in the fall of 2025, a few months after... graduating with my MBA from Cornell Tech. I was applying for a mix of roles, such as product manager or digital strategist, and I knew the competition would be fierce in this tough job market. From portfolios to video cover letters, I tried all sorts of creative methods to stand out and show off my personality, but they didn't work.

A simple, free AI tool that locates hiring managers' emails landed me multiple interviews -- and a job. My first thought process when entering the job market was to imagine myself as a recruiter, getting slammed with thousands of résumés filled with data and numbers. I figured it would be in my best interest to give them a sense of what makes me stand out: my personality.

So, I recorded myself reading my AI-written cover letters, throwing in a joke or two, and attached the video via a private YouTube link. The video tells the recruiters I can speak and present well, and it gives them a sense of who I am. This approach helped me land an interview at Microsoft. They specifically called out the video, saying it made them feel like they already knew me, which I thought was pretty good feedback.

I still wanted to try several different creative ideas. My portfolio was in the form of a timeline. It included pictures of all professional endeavors I thought could help me land a job, from products I've built and my time at Cornell to pictures of me pitching. My goal was to showcase my skill set and personality while also creating something more visually interesting.

I'd also heard of people getting jobs by putting together a slideshow on how they'd improve the company, so I gave it a shot, and it didn't really get me anywhere. Neither of these strategies was worth the time commitment they required. Referrals also got me nowhere. I have a solid network, and that wasn't making a difference.

Interestingly, I applied for a bunch of roles at Microsoft, and the only one I got an interview for was the one I didn't have a referral for. I was reading comments on Reddit from people complaining about their job-hunting struggles, and I saw a few people saying they found success by reaching out to hiring managers directly.

Some people said they cold-called, which made me think, "Okay, that's a little bit too far," but the emphasis was just to reach out. The idea of emailing them seemed low-risk, so I decided to give it a shot. I started by researching on LinkedIn, trying to guess who the hiring manager or recruiter might be. Sometimes it was listed, but it wasn't the best method.

Then I came across a Reddit comment about Apollo AI, a free tool that can locate hiring manager emails. I found it to be pretty accurate, so I started reaching out with my résumé and cover letter. It was a game changer. My messages showed initiative and, honestly, probably just made things easier for the hiring manager.

I reached out to three people directly and got interviewed for two jobs. I even emailed the CEO of Sweetgreen directly, and he responded by putting me in touch with the hiring manager to schedule an interview. One of my email reachouts turned into my current job, a strategy lead role for a major retailer.

This strategy made things more efficient because I already had a direct line of contact, so it was easy to follow up if there was a delay. I was wondering if anyone might be weirded out about me finding their emails, but no one said anything. They could find it creepy, but they could also find it resourceful. If I were back in the job market, I'd start with the email strategy.

The exercise of thinking through creative approaches like portfolios and video cover letters was fun and got me thinking about how to present my personality most effectively, but ultimately, getting in direct contact was the best way to be competitive. Do you have a story to share about a unique job-finding hack? If so, please reach out to the reporter at tmartinelli@businessinsider.com.

Job Market

Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.

States are clamping down on prediction market insider tradingBusiness Insider tells the global tech, finance, stock market, media, economy, lifestyle, real estate, AI and innovative stories you want to know.

Read more "

2026 NFL Draft: A First-Round Mock Based on Insider InformationThis mock draft for the 2026 NFL Draft prioritizes insights from draft insiders and team beat reporters, offering a data-driven prediction of the first round. It highlights potential top picks like Fernando Mendoza, trade possibilities involving Arizona and Dallas, and team-specific preferences like the Giants' interest in Downs.

Read more "

Industry Insider Seeks to Eviscerate U.S. Forest ServiceNewswire Editor is a Common Dreams staff position.

Read more "

Fans Will Love Cardinals Insider's Final Draft PredictionValentine's Day might come twice for the Arizona Cardinals this year.

Read more "

'Political Insider Trading': Kalshi Suspends 3 Congressional Candidates for Betting on Their Own CampaignsSource of breaking news and analysis, insightful commentary and original reporting, curated and written specifically for the new generation of independent and conservative thinkers.

Read more "

A new survey reveals the MLB's most foul-mouthed fanbaseA new Vegas Insider survey reveals the most foul-mouthed MLB fanbases by analyzing Reddit comments, and the Athletics lead the league in expletives.

Read more "
 
more

I tried every trick to stand out in my job search. A tip I found on Reddit was the only strategy that got me an offer.


This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Courtney Clapper, a 32-year-old strategy lead for a major retailer in New York. It's been edited for length and clarity.

I started my job hunt in the fall of 2025, a few months after graduating with my MBA from Cornell Tech. I was applying for a mix of roles, such as product manager or digital strategist, and I knew the competition would be... fierce in this tough job market.

From portfolios to video cover letters, I tried all sorts of creative methods to stand out and show off my personality, but they didn't work. A simple, free AI tool that locates hiring managers' emails landed me multiple interviews -- and a job.

My first thought process when entering the job market was to imagine myself as a recruiter, getting slammed with thousands of résumés filled with data and numbers.

I figured it would be in my best interest to give them a sense of what makes me stand out: my personality. So, I recorded myself reading my AI-written cover letters, throwing in a joke or two, and attached the video via a private YouTube link.

The video tells the recruiters I can speak and present well, and it gives them a sense of who I am. This approach helped me land an interview at Microsoft. They specifically called out the video, saying it made them feel like they already knew me, which I thought was pretty good feedback.

I still wanted to try several different creative ideas.

My portfolio was in the form of a timeline. It included pictures of all professional endeavors I thought could help me land a job, from products I've built and my time at Cornell to pictures of me pitching. My goal was to showcase my skill set and personality while also creating something more visually interesting.

I'd also heard of people getting jobs by putting together a slideshow on how they'd improve the company, so I gave it a shot, and it didn't really get me anywhere. Neither of these strategies was worth the time commitment they required.

Referrals also got me nowhere. I have a solid network, and that wasn't making a difference. Interestingly, I applied for a bunch of roles at Microsoft, and the only one I got an interview for was the one I didn't have a referral for.

I was reading comments on Reddit from people complaining about their job-hunting struggles, and I saw a few people saying they found success by reaching out to hiring managers directly.

Some people said they cold-called, which made me think, "Okay, that's a little bit too far," but the emphasis was just to reach out. The idea of emailing them seemed low-risk, so I decided to give it a shot.

I started by researching on LinkedIn, trying to guess who the hiring manager or recruiter might be. Sometimes it was listed, but it wasn't the best method. Then I came across a Reddit comment about Apollo AI, a free tool that can locate hiring manager emails. I found it to be pretty accurate, so I started reaching out with my résumé and cover letter. It was a game changer.

My messages showed initiative and, honestly, probably just made things easier for the hiring manager. I reached out to three people directly and got interviewed for two jobs.

I even emailed the CEO of Sweetgreen directly, and he responded by putting me in touch with the hiring manager to schedule an interview.

One of my email reachouts turned into my current job, a strategy lead role for a major retailer. This strategy made things more efficient because I already had a direct line of contact, so it was easy to follow up if there was a delay.

I was wondering if anyone might be weirded out about me finding their emails, but no one said anything. They could find it creepy, but they could also find it resourceful.

If I were back in the job market, I'd start with the email strategy. The exercise of thinking through creative approaches like portfolios and video cover letters was fun and got me thinking about how to present my personality most effectively, but ultimately, getting in direct contact was the best way to be competitive.
 
more

They Can't Even Flip Burgers


The Protected Class Finally Meets The Real World

The New York Times tried to write a sympathy piece for the USAID class. It accidentally wrote an indictment. The villain of the story was supposed to be DOGE, the great orange-bad-men-with-spreadsheets monster that came into Washington and started cutting through the federal fat farm. The victims were supposed to be the noble public servants,... contractors, grant managers, NGO executives, and democracy-development professionals who suddenly found themselves outside the taxpayer-funded cocoon. Then the Times gave away the whole game: one former senior vice president at a USAID-funded nonprofit had been making roughly $272,000 a year, and after the gravy train jumped the tracks, she was interviewing for a $19-an-hour job at a spice store.

Normal Americans did not read that and reach for a tissue. They read it and asked the only question that matters: what in God's name were we paying for?

That is what the coastal press still does not understand. A quarter-million-dollar salary means something in the real country. It means working years of double shifts. It means a house is paid off. It means college tuition. It means a small business surviving another year. It means a mechanic, a nurse, a trucker, a cop, a farmer, or a welder would have to grind for years to see what one USAID-world executive was pulling down annually from a system most Americans cannot even see, let alone audit. Then we are supposed to cry because the private economy looked at that résumé and said, "the best we can do is 19 bucks an hour."

No. That is not a human-interest story. That is a flashing red light.

The entire Times frame is backward. DOGE was treated like the marauding villain because it dared to question the sacred bureaucracy. How dare anyone cut government jobs? How dare anyone interrupt the NGO pipeline? How dare anyone ask whether these programs actually work? How dare anyone touch the soft, padded, credentialed ecosystem where public money flows into nonprofit offices, consultant contracts, administrative salaries, stakeholder meetings, and reports about reports. The Times wants Americans to see cruelty. What Americans see is confirmation.

Because if one person in one USAID-funded corner of the NGO complex can make almost $300,000 a year and then struggle to command $19 an hour in the open market, how many more are there? How many vice presidents of capacity-building? How many directors of strategic partnerships? How many senior advisers to initiatives nobody can define? How many people have been living inside the government-funded aquarium, swimming in circles, collecting elite salaries, and calling it service?

That is the real story. DOGE barely got started. It did not gut the federal blob. It nicked it. It scraped a little paint off the hull. It cut some fat, and the permanent class screamed as if the republic itself had been stabbed. But when you pull one thread and a $272,000 NGO salary falls out, the American people are entitled to wonder what the whole sweater looks like.

Washington is full of these hidden economies. They are not always federal employees in the narrow sense. Many sit one layer out, then two layers out, then three layers out: nonprofits, contractors, subcontractors, pass-through organizations, technical-assistance providers, fiscal sponsors, foundations, and professional managerial shops that exist because government money exists. They are close enough to the state to live off it, but far enough away to make accountability foggy. When the money is flowing, they are experts. When the money stops, they are victims.

Meanwhile, the country is drowning in debt. Americans are being told that every basic function of life must cost more. Groceries cost more. Insurance costs more. Housing costs more. Cars cost more. Interest costs more. The national debt is screaming toward $40 trillion, and the same people who lecture the public about sacrifice want tears for the executive class of the foreign-aid machine. What planet are these people living on?

The real economy is not gentle. It has never been gentle to the people who pay for Washington's fantasies. During COVID-19, when the political class shut the world down over a cough and wiped out livelihoods by decree, where were the grand New York Times sob stories for the men in the energy industry who lost their jobs overnight? Where was the national mourning for the welders, roughnecks, truckers, pipeline workers, and small-town families watching an entire way of life get strangled by people working safely from laptops? Those men were told to adapt, retrain, take the hit, and stop complaining. Meanwhile, Sheryl Cowan, the Times' new heroine of bureaucratic martyrdom, was likely still pulling down her elite NGO salary from the comfort of her house. But when the protected class loses access to the taxpayer pipeline, suddenly every lost desk job is a national emergency.

That double standard is the rot. The people who build, fix, deliver, protect, farm, wire, weld, drive, clean, cook, and carry this country are expected to survive reality. The bureaucratic class expects reality to be subsidized.

The Times accidentally showed the country the difference between price and value. The government price was nearly $300,000. The market value, at least in this case, looked a lot closer to $19 an hour -- a quarter-million-dollar gap. That gap is the hidden tax on every American family. That gap is the premium we pay so a credentialed class can lecture us about how terrible our own country is and why we need to send billions of dollars to fund queer theatre in Nepal.

Competence matters. Results matter. Value matters. If someone is truly worth that kind of money, the private sector takes notice. If the only place that salary exists is inside a government-funded grant universe, then the salary was obviously not measuring competence. It was really measuring proximity. Proximity to federal money. Proximity to the right institutions. Proximity to the right vocabulary. Proximity to the people who've spent decades turning public spending into private comfort.

So yes, the cuts were justified. More scrutiny is needed. Every agency, grant pipeline, NGO pass-through, and contractor ecosystem should be examined with the cold patience of an auditor and the suspicion of a taxpayer who has been lied to for too long. The question should be simple: what did America receive for the money? Not what was promised in some glossy annual report. What was delivered?

The country cannot afford a ruling-administrative class that collapses the moment the subsidy disappears. Americans are tired of funding people who look down on them, lecture them, and then demand pity when their artificial economy gets clipped. We are tens of trillions of dollars in debt. The party is over. The fake prestige economy is dead.

The Times wanted us to mourn the fired USAID class.

Instead, it reminded us why they needed to be fired.

Editor's Note: Do you enjoy Townhall's conservative reporting that takes on the radical Left and woke media? Support our work so that we can continue to bring you the truth.

Join Townhall VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
 
more

The Duolingo Taxi Test Could Being Rude To The Driver Cost You Your Dream Job?


The idea behind the recruitment approach is that if someone is rude to a taxi driver, they might be rude at work - especially to those who are junior to them. In the Duolingo case, the candidate ticked lots of boxes for the role. But when the company heard how they treated the driver, the candidate wasn't offered the job.

This resonates with research that found that people will work hard to make... a good impression in a job interview and that these efforts can mask what they are genuinely like.

After all, most people can avoid being rude in a one-off, high-stakes situation. But being friendly at all times can probably only be achieved by those who are genuinely warm people. By assessing people when they are not aware they are being monitored, Duolingo hoped to filter out the truly friendly from those who work hard to fake it.

Duolingo is not the first company to come up with the idea of looking at candidates' behaviour outside the interview room. Companies look at prospective employees' social media for exactly the same reason. People might reveal more of their true selves on social media when they don't know they are being watched by potential employers.

Read more: Putting your CV together? Complete honesty might not be the best policy

But from the candidate's perspective, there are several issues with Duolingo's taxi driver test. First, it may not be ethical to use behaviour to make a hiring decision that is outside of the candidate's consent.

Second, it is unclear what a taxi driver is evaluating when they judge a passenger's behaviour. Maybe someone is nervous about the interview or is stressed because getting to the interview on time on top of their other responsibilities made them rush. Under these circumstances, candidates might seem less friendly than they otherwise would be.

Other candidates might prefer to quietly review their interview notes instead of chatting with the driver. Again, this does not signal a rude person - maybe just an introverted one.Fake only goes so far

But still, are behaviour tests like these a good idea in principle for a hiring manager?

Research suggests that Duolingo might be going overboard in its efforts to detect those who are faking being friendly to make a good impression. Although people have been shown to use a variety of strategies to impress in job interviews and beyond (flattery or "humblebragging", for example), my research has found that many of these tactics are not particularly effective.

This is because people can generally see through insincere efforts to make a good impression. For example, people often forget that in job interviews, discussing their hard work will make them relatable and increase their job prospects. This is because people like to discuss their talents and achievements to make themselves seem competent, but they forget that success usually comes from hard work as well. Discussing it actually makes their success stories seem more sincere and relatable.

And the same is true for thanking others and asking the interviewer questions. If a candidate mainly brags about themselves and treats the conversation as a one-way street, no taxi driver test is needed to identify them as a poor candidate.

People are generally not savvy self-presenters who can fake a good impression consistently. A regular job interview with an experienced hiring manager who can ask about the skills they would bring to the organisation should be enough to identify those who just fake being friendly.

As clever as the taxi driver test sounds, a coffee and a chat with the candidate can probably reveal more crucial information to make sure the right person is hired.
 
more
  • So if I may ask what the problem 🤔 actually so tht I can help u

  • Whenever he comes, you just have to ask him questions about the other work and work data or anything, so he is busy doing such things

    1

A Structured Approach to Modern Career Development


In today's fast-changing job market, career progression is no longer a straightforward path based solely on experience or qualifications. With the rise of automated recruitment systems, remote work competition, and constantly evolving skill requirements, professionals are expected to present themselves strategically, not just competently. This shift has made structured career guidance increasingly... important for anyone looking to advance, switch roles, or re-enter the workforce.

Career coaching has emerged as one of the most effective tools for navigating this complexity. It helps professionals clarify direction, strengthen positioning, and develop a more intentional approach to job searching and long-term career development. For those exploring more structured support in this area, integrated career coaching solutions can help align professional experience with modern hiring expectations by bringing together strategy, positioning, and job search preparation into a cohesive framework.

Why Career Development Has Become More Complex

The modern hiring ecosystem is shaped by technology and data-driven decision-making. Applicant Tracking Systems (ATS) filter applications before they ever reach a human recruiter, and job postings often receive hundreds of applications within days.

Research consistently shows that:

* Over 70-75% of resumes are rejected by ATS filters

* Recruiters typically spend less than 10 seconds reviewing a resume

* A single job opening can attract 200-300 applicants on average

In this environment, even highly skilled professionals can struggle to gain visibility if their career materials and strategy are not aligned with current hiring expectations. This makes structured guidance increasingly relevant, not as an optional support tool, but as part of a modern career strategy.

What Effective Career Coaching Focuses On

Career coaching is not just about improving a resume or preparing for interviews. It is a structured process designed to align a professional's experience, goals, and positioning with market realities.

1. Career Direction and Clarity

Many professionals reach a point where they feel stuck, uncertain whether to continue in their current role or shift into a new direction. Career coaching begins by evaluating:

* Strengths and transferable skills

* Long-term professional goals

* Industry trends and demand

* Viable career pathways

This helps eliminate guesswork and replaces it with a clear, actionable direction.

2. Structured Career Support in Practice

In recent years, many professionals have shifted away from fragmented job search advice toward more integrated, structured support systems that combine multiple aspects of career development. This reflects a broader understanding that successful career progression depends not only on individual elements like a resume or interview skills, but on how all components work together as a cohesive strategy.

A good example of this integrated approach can be seen in career coaching at Resumeble, where career development is treated as a unified process rather than isolated tasks. Instead of focusing on a single area, it brings together resume positioning, career direction refinement, interview preparation, and job search strategy into one structured framework.

This type of support is particularly valuable in today's hiring environment, where automated screening systems, competitive applicant pools, and rapidly changing job requirements make it increasingly difficult for candidates to rely on traditional, unstructured job search methods. By aligning personal experience with market expectations in a more intentional way, professionals are better equipped to navigate the modern recruitment landscape and improve their overall outcomes.

3. Resume Optimization for Modern Recruitment Systems

A resume today is not just a document, it is a data file processed by automated systems. Without proper structure, even strong qualifications can be filtered out.

Effective optimization typically includes:

* ATS-friendly formatting

* Strategic keyword integration

* Clear achievement-based bullet points

* Industry-specific tailoring

This ensures that a candidate is not only qualified but also visible to recruiters.

4. Professional Positioning and Market Alignment

One of the most overlooked aspects of career growth is how a professional is perceived in the job market. Two candidates with identical experience can have very different outcomes depending on how they position themselves.

Career coaching helps refine:

* Personal branding and professional narrative

* Resume structure and achievement presentation

* Keyword alignment for ATS systems

* Industry-specific expectations

Studies show that resumes highlighting measurable achievements (such as percentages, revenue impact, or efficiency gains) can significantly increase interview response rates.

5. Interview Preparation and Communication Strategy

Even when candidates reach the interview stage, many struggle with structuring their responses or presenting their experience confidently.

Career coaching often focuses on:

* Behavioral interview frameworks (such as STAR method)

* Storytelling techniques for professional experience

* Mock interviews and feedback

* Salary negotiation preparation

This stage is critical because interview performance directly determines hiring success, regardless of qualifications.

6. Job Search Strategy and Efficiency

A common mistake among job seekers is applying broadly without strategy. This often leads to burnout and low response rates.

A structured approach helps professionals:

* Identify the right roles and companies

* Focus on high-probability applications

* Improve networking effectiveness

* Track and refine application performance

This shifts the job search from reactive to strategic.

The Real Impact of Career Coaching

Career coaching delivers measurable improvements in both outcomes and confidence. While results vary by individual, common benefits include:

* Faster job placement timelines (often reduced by several weeks or months)

* Increased interview callback rates

* Improved salary negotiation outcomes

* Greater clarity in long-term career direction

Even small improvements, such as a 10-15% increase in interview response rate can significantly impact career momentum over time.

Psychological Barriers in Career Growth

Career challenges are not always technical. Many professionals face internal barriers such as:

* Lack of confidence in self-presentation

* Difficulty articulating achievements

* Fear of career change or transition

* Uncertainty about market value

Career coaching addresses these psychological factors alongside technical improvements, helping individuals present themselves with greater clarity and confidence.

Who Benefits Most from Career Coaching

Career coaching is relevant across multiple career stages and industries. It is particularly valuable for:

* Professionals seeking promotions or leadership roles

* Individuals transitioning between industries

* Job seekers re-entering the workforce

* Recent graduates entering competitive markets

* Remote workers competing in global job pools

In all cases, the goal is the same: to improve clarity, positioning, and outcomes.

Final Thoughts

The modern job market rewards clarity, strategy, and positioning as much as experience. With increasing competition and automated screening systems, professionals can no longer rely on traditional job search methods alone.

Career coaching provides a structured way to navigate this environment, helping individuals make informed decisions, present themselves effectively, and pursue opportunities with confidence.

In a landscape where small advantages can significantly influence outcomes, having a clear career strategy is no longer optional -- it is a key factor in long-term professional success.
 
more

5 Best AI Resume Builders to Beat ATS Filters in 2026


This post was paid for by an advertiser. The Herald-Dispatch newsroom was not involved in its creation.

You hit "submit" and your résumé vanishes. Today, roughly 98 percent of large employers route applications through an Applicant Tracking System, and about three-quarters of résumés are filtered out before a human sees them. Picking the right AI builder is the difference between the interview... pile and the trash.

We spent the past quarter hands-testing 15 platforms, scanning each output through Jobscan and a sandboxed Greenhouse ATS, then scoring six weighted criteria: ATS compatibility, AI content quality, ease of use, template design, value, and support. Five tools stood out.

Snapshot: The Top Builders at a Glance

Builder

Best For

Starting Price

Enhancv

Design-forward résumés that still parse cleanly

Free trial, ≈ $17/mo

Rezi

Pure keyword victory

Free 1 résumé, Pro $29/mo

Kickresume

Instant first draft

Free basic, AI at ≈ $8/mo

Jobscan

Fine-tuning an existing CV

5 free scans, Premium $49.95/mo

Teal

High-volume applications on a budget

Free core, Pro $29/mo

1. Enhancv -- Best Overall for ATS-Friendly Design

More than 15 million job seekers have built résumés with https://enhancv.com, proof that design flair and ATS compliance can coexist. We opened its editor, picked a two-column layout, and pasted a career summary. The built-in ATS checker flagged a stray text box that Greenhouse would miss and offered a one-click fix. Enhancv's 2026 benchmark on Indeed's ATS showed templates averaging 96.7 percent parse accuracy, higher than Google Docs, MS Office, or Canva.

The interface feels like Canva built for recruiters. Drag a section, add a color accent, or turn off a skill bar -- each change updates a live compatibility score. After importing a LinkedIn profile and refining bullet metrics with the AI assistant, we reached a 92 percent Jobscan score in under 15 minutes. Click any bullet and Enhancv proposes stronger verbs or measurable outcomes, offering three concise rewrites rather than walls of generic text.

The free tier lets you build without limits, but exported PDFs carry a watermark; removing it costs about $17 a month quarterly. For roles where design polish matters, the fee delivers a résumé worth attaching.

2. Rezi -- Best for Targeting ATS Keywords

Rezi is a controlled workbench for résumé experiments. Paste a job description and the platform highlights missing keywords and shows how often top applicants use them. An unedited project-manager résumé scored 61 on Rezi's 100-point scale; after we added "stakeholder communication" and quantified two achievements, it reached 88. Templates stay deliberately plain, suiting finance, government, and enterprise-tech roles. Pro is $29 a month, with a lifetime license at $149.

3. Kickresume -- Fastest Draft from a Blank Page

Enter a job title, hit Generate, and GPT-4 produces a résumé skeleton in under 60 seconds. The editor then flags weak verbs, missing metrics, and fluff, raising the score in real time. More than 50 templates parse cleanly if you skip optional photo slots, and mobile apps let you rewrite a bullet on the train. AI features unlock at ≈ $8 per month billed annually.

4. Jobscan -- Best for Squeezing Every Last Percentage Point

Jobscan is an X-ray, not a builder. Paste your résumé and a target posting; seconds later you get a match score, hard- and soft-skill gaps, and overused buzzwords. A marketing résumé we tested scored 54 percent for a SaaS growth role; two Power Edit revisions lifted it to 85 percent. Premium is $49.95 per month, with five free scans included.

5. Teal -- Best Free Hub for High-Volume Applicants

Teal's Kanban tracker places every saved posting next to a customized résumé version and a running match score. Import a LinkedIn profile, toggle sections, and use about 10 free AI bullet generations each week. Templates are plain on purpose, but for anyone blitz-applying on a budget, Teal delivers focused organization and job-ready résumés for free.

The Bottom Line

Enhancv wins overall for 2026 because it treats design and parsing as one problem. Rezi is the pick if you live or die by keyword match; Kickresume if deadlines loom; Jobscan if your draft keeps stalling; Teal if you are applying at volume on a budget.
 
more

High-Volume Tech Application Assistant


I need a reliable, detail-oriented virtual assistant who can submit 100-150 tailored applications every single day for fully remote roles in the technology sector. You'll work mainly through Indeed, Glassdoor, WeWorkRemotely, FlexJobs, and direct company websites, but you're free to expand to any other reputable board that fits my profile. I'll share my résumé, a customizable cover-letter... template, and a master Google Sheet tracker so you always have the latest information at hand. Because I'm not dictating a fixed target list, you'll select suitable jobs yourself, keeping the focus on software-related, product, and other tech-driven positions that match the experience outlined in my documents. Accuracy matters more than speed, yet I still expect the agreed daily volume without rushed copy-paste errors or duplicated submissions. Each evening, please drop a concise update in the tracker so I can review: * company name * job title * platform used * direct application link Deliverables (per day) * 100-150 completed applications, fully submitted * Same-day log in the shared tracker * Zero missed fields, duplicated roles, or expired postings Payment is set at $0.10 per successful application, released once the daily log is verified. To show you've read everything, begin your bid with exactly: "I read your project and I can search job market platform like Glassdoor from google and I can 100-150 completed applications per day". If you're confident you can hit these numbers consistently while preserving quality, let's get started. more

AI in journalism: Live tracker of scandals and mistakes


Round-up of the main cases where AI use in journalism has gone wrong.

AI is being widely used in journalism and can lead to reputation-killing scandals and mistakes if not monitored closely. Here Press Gazette rounds up some of the main examples of where AI has gone wrong.

The Mississippi Free Press has admitted to being the latest news outlet caught out by publishing an AI column written by a... fake author.

The non-profit outlet said the journalist did not seem suspicious until they submitted an invoice that did not match their name.

This was the same way that purported freelance journalist Margaux Blanchard was caught out by Wired last year.

There have been numerous similar cases of AI work mistakenly published by major news outlets in the past year as the technology grows more sophisticated. Sometimes the 'journalists' are caught out pre-publication.

There have also been examples of real writers getting caught out using AI in unsanctioned ways. Australian news website Crikey took down a series of articles because a writer had used ChatGPT in the editing process against its strict AI policy.

In this new page, Press Gazette will keep track of such incidents to help publishers to learn from these mistakes. Last updated: April 2026

If you spot anything that we have missed, please email charlotte.tobitt@pressgazette.co.uk.

Skip to:

Read more in-depth analysis of AI and journalism with a Press Gazette subscription.

The Mississippi Free Press has announced it discovered an opinion column published on 7 April was written using AI and "the 'author' was not who they claimed to be".

The column was headlined: "The gig economy is affecting our communities."

The page remains live but the text of the article has been removed and replaced with an editor's note stating: "This column did not meet MFP's standards and has been removed."

Kevin Edwards, editor of the Voices opinion section, told readers the author has been "purged from our system" and admitted "the mistake was mine".

He explained: "The AI column submitted by this author didn't seem out of the ordinary. In fact, it wasn't until they submitted an invoice that didn't match their name that I grew suspicious. Not of the column itself, but of the author. Was this person who they claimed to be?

It turns out that, no, they weren't. I looked back at our email correspondence and checked out the various social media links they had provided in their email signature. All were dead or nonexistent.

"I searched their name with a company listed on their résumé and found an editor who had already gone through the same song-and-dance with the writer, though he figured out the ruse before he published a fake article. On closer inspection, it turns out that the headshot the writer sent us for his bio picture was also generated with AI."

Edwards added that other columns he had recently been sent from new authors also came "from fake authors with other names that all appeared to come from outside the country. Thankfully, we didn't publish any of those."

He said he has pulled three columns planned for future publication "because I noticed similar signs".

Edwards continued: "It's unfortunate that I have to treat new writers with this level of suspicion, but that is the world we live in and the adjustment I will make. It's easy to suggest just throwing a column in an AI detector, but AI detectors aren't very reliable."

The MFP, he said, is now working on a formal AI policy that will be made public and is organising AI training for staff so they can better spot it when it has been used.

The New York Times has ended its relationship with a freelance journalist who admitted to using AI to help write a book review.

A reader got in touch with the NYT to suggest a January review of "Watching Over Her" by Jean-Baptiste Andrea included "language and details similar" to an earlier review of the same book in The Guardian.

An editor's note added to the top of the NYT review now states: "We spoke to the author of this piece, a freelancer reviewer, who told us he used an AI tool that incorporated material from the Guardian review into his draft, which he failed to identify and remove.

"His reliance on AI and his use of unattributed work by another writer are a clear violation of The Times's standards. The reviewer said he had not used AI in his previous reviews for The Times, and we have found no issues in those pieces."

Alex Preston, the journalist involved, told The Guardian: "I made a serious mistake in using an AI tool on a draft review I had written, and I failed to identify and remove overlapping language from another review that the AI dropped in.

"I am hugely embarrassed by what happened and truly sorry. I took responsibility immediately and apologised to the New York Times, and I also want to apologise to [Guardian review writer] Christobel Kent and to the Guardian."

Australian news website Crikey has taken down an article after discovering AI had been used against its editorial guidelines.

The article about "using ethical influence to create change" was bylined to Jo Tarnawsky, formerly chief of staff to Australia's deputy prime minister.

Three earlier articles in the same series, all published in February and March by the same author, were also removed.

Concerns were first raised by AI professor Toby Walsh who said on Linkedin: "It would have been ethical to have declared that AI wrote much of this article. Shame on you, @crikey_news."

Crikey editor-in-chief Sophie Black said the next day: "Yesterday, we published an article by a contributor who later confirmed they used AI in some aspects of its production.

"This goes against our editorial policies."

Black reported that Tarnawsky said she had used ChatGPT in the production of the article, not to write it but to "sense check... proofread it, spell check, ask for alternative subheadings and in some cases, ask for better phrasings.

"Our editorial guidelines prohibit the use of AI, which is why we've taken the stories down."

Black said Crikey did not send Tarnawsky a link to its editorial guidelines before the article was submitted, which it should have done.

"We need to be clearer with new contributors about these expectations, including where AI is used in a limited capacity. We need to have better fallback measures so that we can catch issues like this before the story is published."

An article by Tarnawsky about the security partnership between the UK, US and Australia for The Saturday Paper published in February now has a note at the bottom that states: "The author of this article made limited use of ChatGPT for research and as a thesaurus. Schwartz Media does not allow usage of AI to produce its journalism."

A network of prominent gaming sites has fired multiple human staff in recent days and misleadingly replaced them with AI writers, complete with fake pics and biogs.

UK-based The Escapist, Videogamer and Esports Insider were taken over by SEO agency Clickout Media in recent months, with up to 20 staff believed to have been fired.

The sites then began to be loaded with AI-written stories about casinos. Read the full Press Gazette story here.

Articles by a freelance journalist called Victoria Goldiee were taken down by four publications after an investigation by The Local Toronto.

The Local's executive editor Nicholas Hune-Brown looked into Goldiee after he commissioned a pitch from her about "membership medicine" and then became suspicious about whether she was actually in Toronto, due to the geographical spread of publications she said she had written for, and the fact she claimed to have done several interviews for the piece already.

He could not find any trace of Goldiee among the Canadian publications she claimed to have written for and a doctor she claimed to have interviewed said they had not spoken.

Hune-Brown then realised Goldiee's email response to his questions and her original pitch had "rote phrasing... all the hallmarks of an AI-generated piece of writing". He contacted people quoted in previous pieces she had published who denied having spoken to Goldiee. He later spoke to her on the phone and "suspected [she] was lying to me with each and every response".

Hune-Brown said he believes the author is from or still lives in Nigeria, possibly explaining an economic reason for the deception.

An article with Goldiee's byline on The Guardian published a month before The Local's investigation has been "removed for editorial standards reasons". The piece was a first-person essay about how music is shared around the UK, which said: "The future of our music is not written by algorithm."

Hune-Brown said: "It was a good ChatGPT piece. It was impressive, and I could see why anyone would be fooled by it. I could see why they would enjoy it. But it has no value to me if it's not created by a person."

A 2024 article about climate change memes by Goldiee was also taken down from non-profit outlet Outrider, which stated: "Upon review, this article did not meet Outrider's editorial standards and it has been removed. We regret the error." A professor quoted in the story told Hune-Brown she had "not spoken with any reporter about that piece of research".

An article was also removed by architecture title Dwell, which said: "An investigation concluded that the article, 'How to Turn Your Home's Neglected Corners Into Design Gold,' did not meet Dwell's editorial standards, and as such, we've retracted it. Our apologies to our readers and the sources previously cited within."

The Journal of the Law Society of Scotland had published an article by Goldiee as part of a series about the future of law on Scotland's high streets in September.

The article was removed on 31 October and editor Joshua King said the article contained quotes that were "disputed and otherwise problematic".

"On the balance of the evidence available, it is now my belief these quotations were falsely attributed to the interviewees and are likely to be fabricated. This is in breach of our editorial guidelines and the author's contractual obligations.

"As editor and on behalf of the Journal, I wholeheartedly apologise for what has happened. I hold myself, the Journal and all our contributors to the highest editorial standards and on this occasion we have fallen well below those standards.

"This is professionally embarrassing and this apology is an article I am disappointed I have to publish when we should be discussing and celebrating all that is happening in this great profession."

King said he had also contacted those who were quoted in the piece directly to "offer my sincere apologies and to confirm that we are urgently reviewing our editorial processes to ensure this does not happen again".

Business Insider removed 38 essays in total after Press Gazette reporting on Margaux Blanchard prompted a wider investigation of its output (see below).

Editor-in-chief Jamie Heller told staff in a memo: "We recently learned that a freelance contributor misrepresented their identity in two first-person essays written for Business Insider. As soon as this came to light, we took down the essays and began an investigation.

"As part of this process, we've removed additional first-person essays from the site due to concerns about the authors' identity or veracity. No news articles or videos were found to have this issue.

"We've bolstered our verification protocols to help prevent anything like this from happening again. We care deeply about the integrity of our work, and we will always do what it takes to make things right."

The Washington Post reported that the author pages of 19 individuals had been removed and replaced with editor's notes.

Wired and Business Insider were among several UK and US online publications that removed articles written by freelance journalist 'Margaux Blanchard' after concerns they were likely AI-generated works of fiction.

Press Gazette revealed Blanchard's pattern of behaviour after being alerted to the author by Dispatch editor Jacob Furedi who had received a suspicious freelance pitch.

Most of the published stories bylined to Blanchard contained case studies of named people whose details Press Gazette was unable to verify online, casting doubt on whether any of the quotes or facts contained in the articles are real.

Wired took down its story soon after publication in May 2025 after receiving an unusual request for payment from Blanchard.

It later said that a "closer look at the details of the story... made it clear to us that the story had been an AI fabrication."

It added that the story "did not go through a proper fact-check process or get a top edit from a more senior editor. First-time contributors to Wired should generally get both, and editors should always have full confidence that writers are who they say they are."

After Press Gazette began looking at Blanchard's published articles and spotted elements that did not appear to exist, articles by Blanchard were removed by titles including Business Insider, SFGate and art and culture title Cone Magazine.

Toronto politics and culture print magazine The Grind delayed its food-themed issue in June after greenlighting several article pitches they later realised were "AI slop".

Editors Fernando Arce and Saima Desai first became suspicious after realising one writer that had written about two immigrant-run Toronto restaurants with direct quotes and descriptions of the interiors was based outside Canada.

When challenged, the writer admitted that the "characters and places in my article are fictional composites... based on real themes" and the article was scrapped.

The editors checked the other commissioned articles and identified seven they said they "strongly suspect were written by AI.

"They all had a similar feel: too neat, too vague. We learned to read the signs: U.S. instead of Canadian spelling, double-barreled article headlines that didn't quite match the drafts, the same author writing an eloquent pitch and then awkward follow-up emails, and drafts riddled with em-dashes."

They challenged the writers on their sources and some provided fake phone numbers and addresses for people they had supposedly interviewed, as well as broken website links.

The editors said they have strengthened their processes for catching AI "garbage" including for vetting new writers, fact-checking drafts early on and using AI detection software.

A summer reading list published in both the Chicago Sun-Times and Philadelphia Inquirer contained books that do not exist.

The list was produced by syndicated content partner King Features, owned by Hearst, and used by a "handful" of US titles. A freelance journalist used an AI agent to create it.

The Chicago Sun-Times said: "It was inserted into our paper without review from our editorial team, and we presented the section without any acknowledgement that it was from a third-party organisation."

The newspaper removed the section from its e-paper edition and updated its policies so third-party licensed editorial content must comply with its editorial standards and is explicitly identified.

The Philadelphia Inquirer's editor Gabriel Escobar said using AI to produce content was a "violation of our own internal policies and a serious breach" and that they were "looking at ways to improve the vetting of content in these supplements going forward".

King Features told the Sun-Times it has "a a strict policy with our staff, cartoonists, columnists, and freelance writers against the use of AI to create content. The Heat Index summer supplement was created by a freelance content creator who used AI in its story development without disclosing the use of AI.

"We are terminating our relationship with this individual. We regret this incident and are working with the handful of publishing partners who acquired this supplement."

The journalist who created the piece, Marco Buscaglia, confirmed to The New York Times that it was partially created by AI.

He said: "It was just a really bad error on my part and I feel bad that it has affected The Sun-Times and King Features, and that they are taking the shrapnel for it."

Dozens of stories were removed or amended by leading publishers after Press Gazette revealed a trend of fake and dubious experts being widely quoted in UK and US media.

Companies selling CBD oil, sex toys, vapes and essay writing services are among those apparently seeking to game the Google algorithm to achieve higher rankings in search by using AI to associate themselves with 'expert' voices and gain links from bona-fide news outlets.

Many of the fake experts use journalist response services to answer journalist queries, with the speed with which they provide quotes suggesting they are using AI.

David Higgerson, chief content officer at Reach which is the UK's largest commercial publisher and was among those to have published experts that do not appear to be real, later said: "It is deeply upsetting and concerning when our journalists - or any journalists across the industry - are misled by people creating fake experts. It is clear that this is becoming a bigger issue, with more sophisticated efforts to mislead being deployed.

"Our readers deserve better and we will continue to tighten our controls around this and work with our newsrooms on training and protocols.

"At the same time the industry will need to work together to develop new ways to manage these growing threats."

Sports Illustrated was accused of publishing AI-written articles after several authors were discovered to have AI-generated headshots and fake names.

One product review author's photo was found for sale on a website selling AI-generated headshots. His author bio described him as someone who "spent much of his life outdoors, and is excited to guide you through his never-ending list of the best products to keep you from falling to the perils of nature".

Sports Illustrated denied that the content itself was generated by AI but Futurism, which first exposed the story, said it had spoken to two sources who said it was.

A spokesperson for Sports Illustrated publisher Arena Group told Futurism a third-party company that produced e-commerce content was to blame and that the articles had been removed.

"Today, an article was published alleging that Sports Illustrated published AI-generated articles. According to our initial investigation, this is not accurate.

"The articles in question were product reviews and were licensed content from an external, third-party company, AdVon Commerce. A number of AdVon's e-commerce articles ran on certain Arena websites. We continually monitor our partners and were in the midst of a review when these allegations were raised.

"AdVon has assured us that all of the articles in question were written and edited by humans. According to AdVon, their writers, editors, and researchers create and curate content and follow a policy that involves using both counter-plagiarism and counter-AI software on all content.

"However, we have learned that AdVon had writers use a pen or pseudo name in certain articles to protect author privacy -- actions we don't condone -- and we are removing the content while our internal investigation continues and have since ended the partnership."

The Sports Illustrated Union said staff were "horrified" by the reporting, adding: "If true, these practices violate everything we believe in about journalism."

Tech news website CNET removed articles written by AI after it had been revealed it had been quietly publishing AI-generated content for months and some errors were identified.

CNET then issued corrections on 41 out of 77 stories written with its AI tool.

Editor-in-chief Connie Guglielmo explained: "In November, one of our editorial teams, CNET Money, launched a test using an internally designed AI engine - not ChatGPT - to help editors create a set of basic explainers around financial services topics.

"We started small and published 77 short stories using the tool, about 1% of the total content published on our site during the same period. Editors generated the outlines for the stories first, then expanded, added to and edited the AI drafts before publishing. After one of the AI-assisted stories was cited, rightly, for factual errors, the CNET Money editorial team did a full audit."

Guglielmo said a "small number" of the articles needed "substantial correction" and "several" others had "minor issues such as incomplete company names, transposed numbers or language that our senior editors viewed as vague".

"We've paused and will restart using the AI tool when we feel confident the tool and our editorial processes will prevent both human and AI errors."

The byline for articles compiled by the AI engine was altered to CNET Money with an AI disclosure more clearly displayed.

Email pged@pressgazette.co.uk to point out mistakes, provide story tips or send in a letter for publication on our "Letters Page" blog
 
more

Top 8 unhinged job application experiences


With unemployment rates on the rise, why are recruiters seemingly making it harder for people to apply for jobs?

A social media user is shining a spotlight on the realities of job hunting in 2026.

An Instagram user shared a video of himself typing on his laptop, then suddenly closing it.

"POV: You decide to just abandon the application coz [sic] they're asking for too much information," he... captioned the clip.

With the rising unemployment rate, you would think that many of his followers would have encouraged him to "hang in there".

However, most agreed and shared their own experiences applying for jobs. It should be as simple as: see a job you like, email your CV and wait for a phone call.

However, these days, there are 101 extra steps before you even get to click "send" or "apply".

Things have become so bad that it wouldn't surprise anyone if recruiters start asking for their Grade 1 report card, because, uhm, good work ethic starts from an early age.

"If the application is stressful, imagine if you get the job," one person noted.

Doing all these things for one or two job applications at a time doesn't feel like a nightmare, but after 50 applications, you are ready to pull out your hair.

Here's a look at some of the most common complaints about job applications on social media.

Many companies often ask applicants to create an account or profile on their website to streamline the process. It makes sense at first, but after creating your 10th account, it starts to feel more like a headache.

It is a tedious administrative exercise, often with no reward. Not to mention the multiple passwords you have to remember.

"Me applying for a job and they ask me to create an account. Byeeeee."

Creating an account is only the first of your admin tasks. After uploading your CV, you need to manually enter it into the provided boxes.

This can be frustrating. It also feels repetitive because you now have extra steps.

"When they ask me to fill out the work history after just uploading a resume. Oh, you got me chopped up."

"What's the point of asking for a cover letter and resume, and then you have to fill out the job application?!? No ma'am."

Social media users agree that asking for "too much information" will make them abandon the entire application. Many noted that some applications take 20 minutes or more, while others ask for information that seems unnecessary.

"And after all that, they still say the salary is 'undisclosed'."

"A lot of these jobs are actually missing out on qualified candidates because of these long, weird applications."

"One asked for my transcripts. Baby, I graduated golden yearssss ago, bye!"

"1 written prompt is pushing it, but when they ask for 3, I immediately close."

One of people's job application pet peeves usually comes at the start of an interview or application: "So, tell us about yourself."

It seems like a silly question when they have all the information readily available in your CV, but many recruiters see it as an icebreaker.

It is one of the few questions applicants prepare for the most, and it helps them feel more confident.

Recruiters also don't expect you to just list your work experience or share a mini bio; they want you to show why you are the right person for the job.

Nonetheless, social media users have had enough of the question.

"You have my resume, so what else do you wanna know? That I like long walks on the beach?"

Cover letters are a key part of the job application process. They allow you to brag about yourself and your achievements, especially the ones you could not add to your 2-page CV.

Cover letters also give you the opportunity to personalise your application and show recruiters why you think you are a good fit for the job.

However, if you are applying for multiple jobs in one sitting, cover letters start to get annoying.

"No, literally, I'm not writing a cover letter for a BS job."

Most job applications do not ask potential candidates to record a short video, but it is becoming increasingly common.

Many candidates are put off by the request, because they have to "doll themselves up" to film a video, sometimes with multiple takes.

If that is not bad enough, whoever is recording the video for you is usually beside themselves with laughter as you put on your best telephone voice.

"'Record a short video.' Okay??? Am I applying for a clown?"

"No, but like they asked me to send them a video of me answering the questions as an interview! And I was just applying for a job, I wasn't even accepted to do an interview yet."

"Bruh! Like, do you want someone competent or nah? Coz how is a video of me talking about myself and a link from my LinkedIn going to prove that I can do the work?"

"'Record a voice note or a video.' I'll rather jump off the cliff."

Some recruiters ask candidates to share links to their social media pages because, like LinkedIn, they can tell a lot.

However, many people have private social media accounts, while others don't use them at all.

"'Provide a link for your social page.' Girl, what? Byeee."

"They boil my blood when they ask for social media account, record a video or explain what's in the CV I've already submitted."

"Like, why do you need to know if I'm married? And like, why do you need to know my socials?"

After all that effort, you still get rejected, or even worse, ghosted. No, "We regret to inform you." You have been ghosted: after creating an account, filling out a 5-page application, and recording a 2-minute video.

Many recruiters don't even get to see all the submitted CVs, as they use AI and an application tracking system to automatically reject those that don't contain specific keywords and skills. Some AI tools can even rank CVs, allowing recruiters to choose the "best" of the bunch.

"The painful part is when u stick it out and finish, and less than a day u get a rejection mail."
 
more

Best 2027 Summer Associate Programs Ranked by Vault


The latest rankings from Vault are drawing attention across the legal industry. Each year, Vault evaluates summer associate programs based on insider feedback from law firm associates. As a result, the rankings offer a detailed look into which firms deliver the best experiences for future lawyers.

Meanwhile, law students and recruiters rely heavily on these rankings. They help candidates identify... firms that invest in training, culture, and long-term career development.

Vault bases its rankings on surveys from junior associates. These respondents evaluate their firms' summer programs across several categories. For example, they assess quality of work, training opportunities, and firm culture.

Additionally, associates consider social experiences and networking opportunities. These factors often shape how summer associates perceive a firm's overall environment.

Therefore, the rankings reflect real, firsthand experiences rather than marketing claims.

Today's law students want more than prestige. They also value meaningful work and mentorship. Consequently, firms that provide hands-on experience tend to rank higher.

Furthermore, flexibility and work-life balance play a growing role. Many candidates now prioritize firms that support well-being during intense summer programs.

Top-tier firms still lead the rankings. These firms offer strong training programs and high-profile work. As a result, they remain attractive to competitive law students.

However, smaller and mid-sized firms are gaining ground. Many now provide more personalized experiences. This shift appeals to candidates seeking closer mentorship.

Firm culture continues to influence rankings significantly. Associates often highlight supportive environments and inclusive teams.

On the other hand, firms with rigid or demanding cultures may fall behind. Candidates increasingly value workplaces where they feel respected and engaged.

Therefore, culture now rivals compensation and prestige in importance.

These rankings serve as a roadmap for students entering recruitment season. They help candidates target firms aligned with their goals.

Moreover, students can compare firms beyond salary figures. This broader view leads to more informed career decisions.

Firms monitor these rankings closely. A strong placement enhances employer branding and attracts top talent.

Meanwhile, lower rankings can signal areas for improvement. Firms may adjust training programs or workplace policies as a result.

Recruiters also benefit from the data. They can better understand candidate preferences and market trends.

Additionally, rankings highlight which firms are gaining or losing appeal among associates.

Recent coverage highlights the increasingly competitive nature of these rankings. Many reports note that firms are investing more in their summer programs than ever before.

For instance, firms are expanding mentorship initiatives and offering more hands-on client work. As a result, candidates gain deeper exposure to real legal practice early in their careers.

Consequently, the competition among firms continues to intensify as each seeks to attract top law students.

For instance, many firms now offer structured mentorship and real client exposure. These improvements aim to stand out in a crowded recruitment market.

As a result, the gap between top and mid-tier programs is narrowing.

The 2027 rankings reflect broader changes in the legal industry. Candidates now expect more transparency and meaningful engagement.

Consequently, firms must adapt to remain competitive. Those that prioritize training, culture, and flexibility will likely continue to rise.

In conclusion, Vault's latest rankings do more than list top programs. They reveal what the next generation of lawyers truly values.

Ready to land your spot at a top-ranked summer associate program? Explore thousands of verified legal job opportunities on LawCrossing and take the next step toward your legal career today.
 
more

Job Seeker Ends Interview After Recruiter Calls His Salary Expectations 'Cute'


Turning to Reddit to express his frustration, a job seeker shared that he abruptly ended his interview with a recruiter after he called the salary range he anticipated for the role "cute." Now he's worried that he may have made a mistake because of the current job market.

Every job seeker has expectations going into an interview, especially when it comes to salary. It's why the lack of... transparency in job listings is so frustrating. No one wants to waste time refining their resume and researching a company if they're basically going to be laughed out of negotiations. Sadly, the state of the economy and limited job availability have him questioning whether he might've been "overreacting" to the recruiter's response.

"I've been job hunting for months now, and after dealing with endless ghosting, you start getting genuinely desperate when an interview finally lands on your calendar. I got a call scheduled for a mid-level role at a company that seemed decent on paper," he began in his Reddit post. "I researched them, prepped my answers, logged onto the video call early, and we started chatting."

He explained that about five minutes into the call, the recruiter asked him about his salary expectations. He gave the recruiter his standard rate based on his experience and skills. He revealed that the recruiter chuckled and replied, "That's a cute number, but we prefer to hire people who are driven by the mission, not the paycheck. We expect 50-hour weeks, but the base rate is non-negotiable."

"I just sat there stunned, genuinely thinking he was testing my negotiation skills or making a weird joke. I asked if there was equity or bonuses to offset the lower base and the extra hours. He just smiled and said, 'No, just the opportunity to work with a rockstar team,'" he added.

The job seeker continued in his post, "Now I'm sitting here staring at my screen, second-guessing myself. The market is so brutal right now, maybe I should've just swallowed my pride and tried to negotiate, but I just don't have the energy to talk myself into glaring red flags anymore."

Needless to say, nearly every single person commenting on the man's post agreed that he did nothing wrong. In fact, most were outraged on his behalf. That doesn't mean that countless job seekers aren't forced into roles paying well below their value as an employee, simply because they can't afford otherwise.

A ZipRecruiter survey found that 27% of Americans starting new jobs took a pay cut from their previous position just to secure employment. The survey reported, "When facing extended unemployment, restarting income and benefits often takes priority over holding out for a higher salary."

No one would argue that having a job is better than not having a job, but if you still can't afford to pay for the basics as a full-time employee it makes you wonder if it's worth it.

With the cost of living rising, many people's paychecks don't cover the amount they need to survive. Research from Patriot Software, a payroll service, found that a whopping 44% of U.S. adults who applied for a job in the past year say they are unlikely to apply to any position that doesn't list a salary range.

Add to that the fact that 84% of job seekers believe companies intentionally hide a role's salary to reduce workers' negotiating power. Why would anyone want to waste their time applying for a job that won't pay the bills?

A 2026 J.D. Power Survey found that 65% of employed consumers are struggling to pay for necessities like groceries and rent simply because inflation is rising faster than their earnings. Basically, no one is getting cost-of-living wages. So prices on everything are going up, but earnings are barely rising or completely stagnant.

It's not really surprising that many job seekers, like this man who cut his interview short, would rather keep looking and try their luck, potentially staying unemployed longer, if it means landing a job that meets their salary expectations.

In all honesty, this job seeker did the right thing because based on the recruiter's acknowledgment of the role and demands of working at the company, it wouldn't have been a good fit in the first place. Of course that's easier said than done when faced with mounting bills and no way to pay them.
 
more