There is no denying that the job market is in a dire state. Hiring has dropped to levels as low as mid-pandemic rates, with 26 percent of unemployed workers searching for a job for over six months or more. This “low-hire, low-fire” state of the job market leaves graduating college students in the dark in terms of the “what-next.”
Reportedly, by the end of 2025, 83 percent of companies were using AI to screen applications. 56 percent of companies have expressed concerns about AI rejecting qualified candidates. Many companies have even admitted to the use of ghost job listings–listings for positions that do not exist or they have no intention of filling–in order to build resume databases. A vast majority of applications will never be seen by human eyes.
With recession odds climbing and cost of living prices increasingly unaffordable for Americans, young people face being left entirely out of the market equation. Amongst students at the University, fear for the future of hiring and the work across various fields is felt, as many consider post-graduation and early career prospects.
“AI being used by both hiring management and applicants just becomes bots talking to each other,” said one University student. “You’re punished for being creative or different or anything human.”
It is not only AI in the hiring process that inspires concern—AI is warping entire fields. In the particular case of journalism, use of AI threatens jobs, and may lead to inaccuracies due to information “hallucinations,” lost ethical judgement, critical thinking and a lower standard of the way information is delivered to audiences.
“I work in media, written and digital,” said Zander Sutton, a Media Communications student at the University. “I’ve watched my industry shrink because some publications have switched to AI-enhanced articles.”
“I’ve seen people I know go from full time, to contract, to free-lance roles,” he said. “Positions are being cut, management keeps more money, and the quality of written articles gets lower and lower.”
“Websites use the same phrases over and over again, they might not fit with the style of writing, they’re often very generalized—they feel forced,” Sutton continued. “As the quality of writing goes down, you risk viewers who actually care about the contents of the writing leaving the website altogether.”
It is a double-edged sword, and is the case for many fields–as meaningful work by real people is devalued, and entry into the market becomes more reliant on AI navigation, more low-quality work is created, and there is less work being supported to combat this depletion.
A critical, even dystopian, picture is painted by this market landscape. When AI is used in the hiring process, young people with valuable perspectives, qualifications and the potential for meaningful contribution are disqualified without consideration, thus jeopardizing the future quality of what is produced.
The time that may be saved by companies shifting to AI-powered hiring is not worth the loss of qualified candidates in the workforce. When companies use AI for company operations, publications or production–especially in fields that require human perspective and skill like journalism, arts, communications, media and many others–they trade out both their quality and their integrity.
