AI use in the job market is creating an endless vicious cycle

Summary

An article in Wired argues that AI tools used by both job seekers and employers are creating a self-reinforcing 'vicious cycle' that degrades hiring quality for everyone. The piece also notes that the core assumption behind this outcome—that all applicant tracking systems rank candidates using AI—is often incorrect.

Why it matters

The article highlights a feedback loop where AI-generated applications overwhelm employers, prompting them to rely more heavily on AI-based screening, which in turn pushes candidates to produce even more AI content. This dynamic erodes trust and signal in a weak job market. Millions of job seekers spend $30–50 per month trying to adapt to ranking systems that may not even exist at their target employers, while employers are buried under piles of nearly identical applications.

Highlights

• Doist’s internal test revealed that the person they actually hired would not have made the AI-generated shortlist.
• A hiring expert received dozens of interviews and a job offer despite having extremely low Jobscan scores, disproving the tool’s core assumption.
• Greenhouse CEO: 'More AI use begets more AI use; no one benefits from this. The more widespread it becomes, the worse the outcomes get.'

Critical take

While the 'infinite vicious cycle' framing is rhetorically effective, the narrative relies on a single supplier CEO (Greenhouse) who has a commercial interest in the issue. The article provides no quantitative data on how widespread AI-based ATS screening actually is. Consequently, the term 'infinite' feels more like an editorial embellishment than a claim grounded in evidence.