It was only a matter of time before this happened in a live interview. During a recent video interview for a role based in London, it became clear early on that the candidate was using an AI app to generate suggested answers in real time. From the interviewer's side, the effect was obvious: pauses to read from the screen, a delivery that felt stilted and unnatural, and answers that sounded rehearsed rather than genuine.

The irony is that the tool produced the opposite of what it was meant to achieve. The candidate came across as underprepared, not polished. Worse, when asked simple, direct questions, like why specifically they applied for the role, or which skills would matter most to succeeding in it, they struggled to answer properly. 

Also, know this: the live-feed approach also demands a level of acting most people simply don't have: looking natural while reading or listening to a prompt is a genuinely hard skill to pull off convincingly.

None of this is an argument against using AI to prepare. Quite the opposite. The smarter use of these tools is in the lead-up to an interview, not during it. Use an app to rehearse likely answers, map out the angles you want to steer the conversation toward, and sharpen the questions you plan to ask the interviewer. Do that preparation thoroughly, then turn the app off before the interview starts.

Technology should work with a candidate, not stand in for them in the moment that matters most. The preparation an AI tool can support is genuinely valuable. The live crutch it can become is not. If you're getting ready for an interview, use the tools to build your confidence beforehand, then walk in and let your own preparation carry you through.