The process started off very smoothly. I had a video interview with the recruiter and we spoke for almost 45 minutes. At the end she told me she was putting my application at the top of the list and that I would hear back in a few weeks. Less than a week later I got an email from the recruiter saying they were not moving forward with my application. Totally fine, but don't say things like, "You're a top candidate," unless you mean it.

After submitting my application, I was contacted by HR right before the holidays, and I had a had a pleasant conversation with the representative during which she expressed enthusiasm about my background. I was then sent a writing exercise to complete over the holidays. After submitting my exercise, the representative shared that the team had liked the work I submitted. It then took three weeks to hear back about the next step, which was a joint interview with the company's founder, chairman, and chief talent officer Ralph Bartel, and the Global Head of Brand and Content. I thought it was a bit odd to meet with the head of the company before meeting the hiring manager, but I assumed it was a scheduling conflict. Upon confirming the next step, the representative informed me that they wished to interview me at the associate publisher level as opposed to the publisher level for which I'd applied, but they would honor the salary of the more senior position -- another red flag. Despite this, I continued with the interview process, but I wish I hadn't. While the Global Head of Brand and Content was lovely and professional, Mr. Bartel was extremely rude: Within 15 minutes of our conversation, he proceeded to tell me that the problem with my generation is that use of tools for measuring key performance indicators for websites, like analytics, have "made you brainless". He then continued to make proclamations about how he thought I worked, diminished my past experiences, and complained of his current editorial team's inability to justify why content is selected for members beyond its proven ability to resonate with the audience. He made it very clear that he wished his online travel deal site was more like the Travel + Leisure or the National Geographic Traveler of the pre-internet era, where writers would tell the stories they wanted to tell, and that it was my generation's fault that no one knows how to use intuition to create content anymore. I offered a few examples of my storytelling efforts that I felt were successful beyond visitor metrics in that they helped meet other goals (both personal and institutional), but he was not interested in hearing it. Needless to say, I left that interview feeling sorry for his staff and knowing this wasn't the right place for me. I received a note from the HR rep the next day that the team had decided not to move forward with my candidacy. In hindsight, I don't think they ever intended to. Mr. Bartel seemed more interested in trying to shame me for my career and accomplishments than he did in hiring me.