I typically do not write online reviews of a company I've interviewed for or worked with; however, because of the level of incompetency throughout all stages of my interview process, I feel it is necessary other women (especially young women, like myself) know what they're getting into when they apply to Bustle. FYI: This will be VERY long. I am a recent college graduate, whose career is obviously in its early stages. Before my graduation, I spoke to a career counselor about my interest in freelance writing; she encouraged me to apply to a News Writer's position at Bustle, as it would help me create a more robust portfolio, and is also a relatively well-known name in digital journalism. At her behest, I applied, and heard back rather quickly from their News Editor. They informed me that they were interested in having me continue the application process, and to finish a four-hour, unpaid edit test. The length of the test alone is ridiculous, but to ask a recent college graduate whose career is in a vulnerable stage to do unpaid work is incredibly manipulative. Though I felt this way at the time, I completed the edit test anyway. It is important that I note this: I had looked at Glassdoor reviews of Bustle prior to applying. It seems like the nightmare I experienced is emblematic of a larger problem, rather than an isolated incident. One of the worst accusations some reviewers lodged is their fear that the work they did for the edit test (which included, pitching 3-5 headlines, several articles, and writing one full news article, links and photos included) was being stolen. I can confirm that this is more than likely the case: after completing my own edit test, I nervously checked their News section to see if they'd taken any of my work. Sure enough, the article I had written was loosely plagiarized by another author (my links and everything!), on the day I had submitted mine to the editor. I chalked this (stupidly) up to coincidence. I received an e-mail shortly after my submission, again from the editor, saying they and their team were "impressed" by my edit test, and that they wanted me to complete another round. This time, it would be a four-hour trial day, UNPAID, where I worked with the editor one-on-one as if it were a typical work day. I was appalled that they were still asking for such extensive work without the promise of pay (or a job!), but agreed again. I completed the trial day in just under four hours (which involved writing two articles: one hard news, one in "listicle" format). I was told I'd hear back within the week. It took nearly two weeks for the same editor to get in touch with me. I had sent an e-mail, maybe around the eight-day mark, inquiring as to the status of my candidacy. She apologized for not responding sooner, but assured me that I would hear back. When I finally did, the position she had originally alleged "needed to be filled immediately" was already given away. Similar work that I completed during my farce of a "trial day" also, miraculously, found its way into Bustle's News section, which I checked thoroughly again after submitting my articles. Nonetheless, the editor assured me she was still "impressed" by my edit test/trial day, and wondered if I would be interested in working a shift or two for her colleague. She CC'd this new editor in our e-mail chain. Rather than burn a bridge, I confirmed that I would be interested. The new editor got in touch that day with information about the position. I responded almost immediately and asked about the application process (this time, I was fully prepared to refuse any demand for unpaid work, having already done what amount to eight hours of zero pay). Three days passed, and I ever heard from the editor. Finally, I sent a follow-up e-mail, stating that I never received a reply from them, but that I was interested in knowing more about the application process. Not even three minutes after I sent that e-mail, the editor responded: they said they would get back to me in two weeks max, and that they were considering both my edit test and trial day in their decision. I am sure I will not hear back. ESSENTIALLY: Pay attention to the reviews on here. When they say the interview process is bad, don't be like me and assume it'll be any different. This company presents itself as supporting the work of women and valuing their contributions, when in reality, I firmly believe they play cat-and-mouse with applicants in the hopes of getting free work out of people who are vulnerable during the interview process. I don't think they ever intended on hiring me, which is discouraging, frustrating, and downright wrong. For a "feminist" company led by teams of women, they are failing to promote upcoming female writers, and in my experience, were unethical from start to finish. I wish I hadn't wasted so much time.

I was invited to participate in an edit test, having submitted an application through the site's recruitment portal. This test required quite a few hour's worth of concentrated work (and was unpaid). Unfortunately, communications from staff were slow and the onus seemed to be placed on applicants to contact recruitment after quite a long period of time to query the status of position decision-making. While this is likely not the fault of staff, who are presumably overwhelmed with work and applications, this is not the most respectful approach to recruitment, given the involved and unpaid nature of the edit test.

I had to submit writing samples and then had to take a writing test that took several hours and involved me pitching ideas and writing short news pieces. They asked about my experience writing and what other outlets I had written for.