I don’t think anything will change unless you name and shame the companies. Why protect them?
Until companies hear “I passed because of the ageism I saw when I googled your company,” there isn’t any reason not to behave this way.
Until companies hear “I passed because of the ageism I saw when I googled your company,” there isn’t any reason not to behave this way.
It could be the interviewer was trying to ask something beneficial like "explain to us why your additional years of experience make you more valuable than someone who lacks that additional experience?", but wasn't worded well, and with a little spin or removal of context, gets turned into the opposite of what they meant.
Similarly the marriage one comes up a lot. People instantly assume that the implication is they might quit and become a housewife. But in context it could also be the interviewer trying to sell their company's and city's benefits for their specific lifestyle (whatever it is), to try and further attract the candidate.