A 29-year-oldused a weird resume to get 30k interviews in a week (businessinsider.com)

The bot is here: https://landbot.io/u/H-21339-D3E1Y71AQ500MEJ8/index.html

David Vidal, who is in marketing, programmed a bot to answer standard job interview questions.

"Vidal's bot was used 30,000 times, and he got 14 online interviews and 11 job offers as a result."

Ok now start 52 jobs, collect the first weeks' pay, and take the rest of the year off.

This article is poorly written. It says the bot was used by more than 30,000 people. Does this imply 30,000 people looking for jobs used his bot or that 30,000 recruiters used his bot to screen candidates or 30,000 job applications were sent by him or (more than likely) a substantial portion of bots make up that 30,000?

Note the difference between the below two items:

1. Title: A 29-year-old marketing expert used a weird resume to ___get 30,000 interviews___ in a week

2. A subheader bullet point: Vidal's bot was used 30,000 times, and he ___got 14 online interviews___ and 11 job offers as a result.

Does 30,000 somehow equal 14?

(Answer: only if you equate 30,000 self-service chatbot conversations ("interviews" as claimed) as as meaningful and valuable as an actual human-to-human interview. Basically, this article has a deceptive clickbaity title.)

(I emailed BusinessInsider's corrections account about this. corrections@insider.com)