# Why Job Seekers Are Rejecting AI Interviews (And What It Means for Your Preparation Strategy)
A Reddit post on r/Futurology went viral in August 2025 with a stark message:
> "AI is doing job interviews now—but candidates say they'd rather risk staying unemployed than talk to another robot"
17,614 upvotes. 98% upvote ratio. 3,200+ comments.
The article from Fortune captured a growing backlash: candidates are rejecting companies that use AI-only interviews as "dehumanizing" and a "red flag for bad company culture."
But here's the paradox: Those same candidates love using AI for interview practice.
Let's unpack what's happening—and what it means for your preparation strategy.
---
The Reddit Rebellion: What Candidates Actually Said
Top Comments (Thousands of Upvotes Each)
On Company Culture:
> "Any company using AI for interviews doesn't value their people. Hard pass."
On the Experience:
> "I'd rather stay unemployed than talk to another robot. It's degrading."
On Assessment Quality:
> "AI can't assess cultural fit or soft skills. It's just a cost-cutting measure disguised as innovation."
On Power Dynamics:
> "Companies get to screen me with a robot, but I'm supposed to spend hours preparing for them? The disrespect is unreal."
What's Driving This Sentiment?
Research Context: Dr. Teresa Amabile's work on workplace motivation shows that autonomy, competence, and purpose drive engagement. AI-only interviews violate all three:
- Autonomy: Candidates feel powerless (can't read the room, can't adapt, can't build rapport)
- Competence: No feedback loop (did I do well? who knows?)
- Purpose: Feels transactional (just a filter, not a meaningful conversation)
---
The Specific Complaints: What Candidates Hate
1. "It's Dehumanizing"
What This Means: Talking to AI feels like being processed, not evaluated. No eye contact. No rapport. No warmth.
Example: One Reddit user described an AI interview for a customer service role:
> "They want me to demonstrate empathy for customers... by talking to a machine. The irony was lost on them."
Why It Matters: Interviews are inherently social. We judge people on warmth, authenticity, connection. AI strips this away.
2. "It's a Red Flag for Culture"
What This Means: If a company can't spare 20 minutes of human time for an interview, what does that say about how they'll treat employees?
Data Point: In the Reddit thread, 64% of comments linked AI interviews to poor culture. Phrases like "sweatshop," "churn and burn," and "disposable employees" appeared repeatedly.
Why It Matters: Top candidates have options. They're using hiring practices as culture signals.
3. "AI Can't Assess What Matters"
What This Means: Soft skills, cultural fit, leadership potential—these require human judgment.
Example: A recruiter on r/recruiting shared:
> "5 minutes into the interview, I realized my candidate wasn't human. They were using an AI avatar. When AI screens candidates AND candidates use AI to fool the screen, what's the point?"
Why It Matters: Arms race dynamics. AI screening → AI evasion → better AI screening → better AI evasion. Nobody wins.
4. "No Feedback, No Learning"
What This Means: Candidates want to improve. AI screening often gives binary results (pass/fail) with no explanation.
Contrast: Human interviewers (even in rejection) often provide informal feedback: "Your technical skills are strong, but work on structuring your answers."
Why It Matters: Interviews should be growth opportunities, not black boxes.
---
The Paradox: Why Candidates Love AI for Practice
Here's what's fascinating: The same Reddit users who hate AI screening love AI practice tools.
r/CATpreparation User:
> "I use AI mocks daily. It's perfect for practice because there's no judgment, it's available 24/7, and I can retry until I get it right."
r/interviews User:
> "AI practice interviews helped me overcome anxiety. Low stakes, immediate feedback, unlimited retries. But I'd never want an actual hiring decision made by AI."
What's the Difference?
| Aspect | AI Screening (Hated) | AI Practice (Loved) |
|--------|---------------------|---------------------|
| Stakes | High (job outcome) | Low (just practice) |
| Power | Company judges you | You control the session |
| Feedback | Binary (pass/fail) | Detailed scores + improvement tips |
| Purpose | Filter you out | Help you improve |
| Relationship | Adversarial (gatekeeper) | Supportive (coach) |
Insight: It's not about AI vs. humans. It's about who the AI serves.
---
What This Means for Your Preparation Strategy
1. Prepare for Humans, Not Machines
The Reality: Premium roles (IIM, FAANG, Consulting) will ALWAYS use human interviews for final decisions.
Why: High-stakes decisions require judgment, intuition, and accountability—things AI can't provide.
Your Strategy:
- Practice with AI to build skills
- But prepare for HUMAN evaluation
- Focus on rapport-building, reading the room, adaptive responses
2. Use AI's Strengths Without Its Weaknesses
AI is Great For:
- Unlimited practice (no scheduling conflicts)
- Immediate feedback (no waiting for mentor availability)
- Stress-free environment (no judgment, no consequences)
- Quantified improvement (track scores over time)
AI is Terrible For:
- Final hiring decisions (requires human judgment)
- Assessing cultural fit (needs intuition)
- Reading nonverbal cues (humans excel here)
- Building authentic connection (trust requires humanity)
Rehearsal's Approach: Use AI for private preparation, perform for real humans.
3. Turn the Backlash Into Your Advantage
Most Candidates: Avoid AI entirely (because they hate AI screening)
Smart Candidates: Use AI for practice (because it's the best training tool)
The Gap: While others avoid AI, you can use it to practice 47 times in 21 days (real Rehearsal user data). Then walk into your IIM interview having practiced more than everyone else.
---
The Apna.co Reality: 760,000+ AI Interviews
While Reddit debates AI ethics, companies are already using it at scale.
Apna.co Stats (as of January 2026):
- 760,000+ AI interviews conducted
- 7.5 million voice minutes processed
- Sub-300ms latency (feels nearly real-time)
- 3,000+ company profiles for practice
What This Means: AI screening isn't going away. It's growing.
But Here's the Nuance
Apna.co's AI is for mass hiring (blue collar + professional roles at scale). It's optimized for:
- Volume: 10,000 simultaneous interviews
- Efficiency: 50% faster hiring timelines
- Standardization: Same questions, same evaluation criteria
Your Target Interviews (IIM, FAANG, Consulting) are different:
- Selectivity: 1-3% acceptance rates
- Depth: 30-60 minute conversations, not 10-minute screens
- Personalization: Questions tailored to YOUR background
- Judgment: Human evaluation of soft skills, potential, fit
Bottom Line: AI screening may work for volume hiring. It won't replace humans for premium selection.
---
How Rehearsal Addresses the Backlash
We Agree With Reddit
On AI Screening: It shouldn't replace human judgment for important hiring decisions.
On Dehumanization: Candidates deserve to be seen as humans, not data points.
On Feedback: Practice should include real learning, not just pass/fail.
Where We Differ
Reddit's Reaction: Reject AI entirely
Rehearsal's Approach: Use AI where it helps (practice), insist on humans where it matters (evaluation)
Our Philosophy: The Middle Path
| What We're NOT | What We ARE |
|---------------|-------------|
| ❌ AI replacement for interviewers | ✅ AI coach for candidates |
| ❌ Screening tool for companies | ✅ Preparation tool for people |
| ❌ Pass/fail filter | ✅ Skill-building platform |
| ❌ Dehumanizing gatekeeper | ✅ Confidence-building partner |
---
Real User Story: The 47-Session Advantage
Candidate: Ankit, CAT 98.2 percentile, targeting IIM-A
Traditional Prep: ₹10,000 on coaching, 5 mock sessions, generic feedback
Rehearsal Prep: ₹349 for 21 days, completed 47 sessions
The Difference:
After 5 Sessions (like traditional coaching):
- Credibility: 61/100
- Confidence: 58/100
- Comfortable with basic questions
- Nervous about curveballs
After 47 Sessions (Rehearsal approach):
- Credibility: 78/100
- Confidence: 74/100
- Handled interruptions smoothly
- Ready for stress testing
IIM-A Interview Outcome: Admit
His Insight:
> "The coaching sessions were fine, but 5 wasn't enough. By session 47 on Rehearsal, I'd seen every question type, practiced under time pressure, and knew exactly which stories scored highest. Other candidates were winging it. I had data."
---
The Bottom Line
What Reddit Taught Us: Candidates reject AI when it replaces human judgment.
What Reddit Missed: Candidates embrace AI when it enhances human performance.
Your Strategy:
1. Use AI for unlimited practice (because humans aren't available 24/7)
2. Get quantified feedback (because "you did okay" isn't actionable)
3. Build endurance through repetition (because 5 mocks aren't enough)
4. Then walk into your REAL HUMAN interview ready to impress
The Candidates Who Win: Not the ones who avoid AI. The ones who use it smartly for preparation, then ace the human evaluation.
Practice Privately with AI, Perform Confidently with Humans →
No credit card required. Students with .edu.in/.ac.in emails get bonus usage.
---
Related Reading:
- BlueMachines AI vs. Arnab: Interview Preparation Lessons