I have been wary of people that don’t watch TV (or movies) since my late teens. At this point, I have judged people for their refusal to sit still for at least a half hour once a week more than I have not judged them for that. Yet, I did not predict that this wariness would steel me against a surprise rejection while interviewing for my next position.
The pathway to this rejection was paved with many of the decision makers commenting on how I was a great fit. I would later find out I was the person to beat, and I was beat out by the perception that I was not the “sure thing” because I asked questions. Now, my curiosity alone did not hurt my chances of securing the job. The types of questions – how the university supports their workers, whether grant pursuits are supported at a small institution, how do students involve themselves in the department, what are the ways faculty & students interact – made this potential employer think I wanted a bigger institution as my landing spot, which is false. Only one of those questions – the one about the grants – alludes to a large institution with a research focus, and it barely does that. All of my questions were designed to understand how they prioritize their students and the potential longevity of my career there if I decided to accept a position.
I could have predicted this rejection if I tuned into the alarms going off when I asked a question about current TV and movie viewing during an awkward dinner conversation. Both potential co-workers admitted they didn’t really watch TV. I knew it was a red flag but didn’t know how until I got the feedback as I was being rejected. I thought I’d have nothing to talk about with them beyond work topics.
If they were the type to tune in, even peripherally, to pop culture, they would have seen others succumb to their mistakes driven by misinformed assumptions and perceptions. Instead of clarifying their points of view with additional questions to their #1 candidate, they assumed their interpretation was correct and final. This has been the downfall of both reality and fictional TV characters. Entire series have been built around the idea that “my perception is the only valid one.” An entire season twist of The Bachelor came from the lead of the season thinking one of his final two was more of a sure thing than the one that had his infatuation. I’m talking about Arie’s season. He chose Becca because she was more confident in her feelings for him, but then Arie became the villain of his own season as he rejected his #1 choice to pursue his #2 because the feelings were so strong and distracting. You are the villain unnamed potential employer, and I was able to get over you pretty quickly because I knew you were naive. You would’ve known if you would have sat through multiple hours of reality TV that could be smooshed into 3 hours of highlights.
Okay, I see why you avoided that particular TV route, but you could have avoided so much trouble if you at least tried to see things from another point of view. Hope you’re happy Arie-in-University-form!