I was initially invited to an interview with two members of staff from the editorial team, who were lovely. The interview itself went well and I went away with a great impression of the company. I was then contacted later that afternoon with positive feedback (I was put forward for the role by an agency) and asked to submit a copy test the following morning. I submitted it and, within a few days, I was requested to attend another interview, with a different member of staff, two days later. They knew I was travelling a decent distance to interview for the role, but I forked out £180 for last-minute train tickets so that I could be there at the time requested. The second interview went well, lasted about 45 minutes and, again, I went away with a really good impression of the company and its employees, and was told I'd be contacted within a few days. The following morning, I was contacted by the recruiter to let me know that despite 'really liking' me, TB had decided that they were going to 'change' the requirements for the position, and were now looking for someone with more experience. Which is 100% fair – I was already quite surprised they were interested in me because I don't have any unpaid interning experience on my CV, and I understand this is is a tough industry – but it irks me that, when they knew that they were going to change the job requirements all along (pretty sure they would have known; it's hard to believe that they'd make such a snap decision in under 24 hours) they felt the need to mess me around by travelling to London twice, and asking me to complete a copy test. The questions asked in the second interview were very similar to the first, so they'd already ascertained what they needed to know about my qualification levels and my previous experience. I asked for feedback and it was all positive, which, again, baffles me. Overall, the company ended up coming across as poorly organised and unethical.