A Correction: The 120-Character Job Posting Was Our Reading of It
Based on 257,534+ analyzed job listings · Updated 2026-08-16
This page used to lead with a comparison we were pleased with: JPMorgan Chase appears in our corpus with a median description of 120 characters through one source and over 5,000 through another, a 41.7x gap with the employer held fixed. We concluded that how much a posting tells you is a property of the channel rather than the employer. Then we checked the source, because we had just been caught making exactly this mistake about Apple's salaries. The 120-character source is jpmc.fa.oraclecloud.com, which is JPMorgan's own careers portal, not a third-party board. A candidate opening that page sees the full posting. What we stored was a single summary sentence. The gap was ours.
See where you actually stand in this market
Upload your resume and Seeker compares you against current openings — which roles fit your experience, and which are screening you out.
41.7x
What this page claimed
Retained as the figure being corrected, not as a current claim
130 chars
What we stored for a JPMorgan role
One complete sentence: a summary field, not a truncation
The employer's own portal
What the 120-char source actually is
jpmc.fa.oraclecloud.com, which renders the full posting to a candidate
9.5%
Postings under 500 characters
4,954 of 52,300 sampled. This measurement stands; the explanation does not
14 of 18
Employers where boards agreed anyway
Reported on the original page, and the part that aged best
2
Times this class of error has now bitten us
Apple's salary, and this
Median stored description length by source, in characters
Bars scaled to the largest value, 5,000
This chart is what WE hold, and that is now all it claims. A short bar means our pipeline captured little, which may be a feed limit, a summary field, or a page we failed to read. It is not a statement about what a candidate sees on the employer's site.
What we can and cannot say about a short posting
| Observation | Status | Why |
|---|---|---|
| 9.5% of postings we hold carry under 500 characters | STANDS | A measurement of our own corpus, stated as such |
| oracle_cloud median is 123 characters | STANDS | True of what we store |
| adzuna descriptions are hard-capped at exactly 500 | STANDS | A visible property of that feed |
| JPMorgan: 120 chars on one board vs 5,000 on another | WITHDRAWN | The 120-char source is JPMorgan's own portal; a candidate there sees the full posting |
| Apple: 879 chars on its own feed vs 4,682 via TheMuse | WITHDRAWN | Same defect. Apple's page carries far more than we read, including the pay block |
| How much a posting tells you is decided by the board | WITHDRAWN | It is substantially decided by what our connector reads |
| 14 of 18 multi-board employers showed no gap | STANDS | And is now the most useful line on the page |
The pattern in the withdrawn rows: every one of them compares OUR copy against OUR copy and then draws a conclusion about the outside world. The rows that stand are the ones that only ever claimed to describe our corpus.
Source: Seeker job corpus, 257,534 active job postings, snapshot 2026-08-16. seekerscore.com/insights/how-much-a-posting-tells-you-2026
Correction, 2026-08-16
What this page claimed: 'JPMorgan Chase publishes a median of 120 characters through one feed and over 5,000 through another, in the same weeks,' and from that, 'How much a job posting tells you is decided by the board, not the employer.' What is true: the 120-character source is `jpmc.fa.oraclecloud.com`, JPMorgan's own Oracle-hosted careers portal. It is not a third-party job board, and a candidate who opens one of those URLs sees a full job posting. What our pipeline stored for one of them, in full, is a single sentence: 'As a Private Client Banker, you are the point of contact for a select group of Chase's clients as well as customers in the Branch.' That is a clean, complete summary sentence rather than a truncation, which is the signature of a short-description field being read instead of the body. The Apple comparison on this page fails the same way and is withdrawn with it.
Why we caught it this time
Because a reader had just caught us doing the identical thing with Apple's salaries a few hours earlier, and told us to stop treating our own corpus as source truth. The Apple case was: Apple publishes pay, our connector never read the block it lives in, and we published '1 of 4,948' as a fact about Apple. This case is: JPMorgan publishes a full description, our connector reads a summary field, and we published '41.7x' as a fact about job boards. Same shape, different field. The second one was found by applying the lesson from the first, which is the only reason this correction exists before the page had a chance to travel.
What stands, and it is not nothing
Every measurement on this page was accurate about our corpus. 9.5% of the postings we hold carry under 500 characters. oracle_cloud's median stored description really is 123 characters. adzuna really does deliver descriptions hard-capped at exactly 500, which is a visible property of that feed rather than an inference. And the counter-example set, which we reported at the time because it cut against our own thesis, has aged best of anything here: for 14 of the 18 employers where a median could be computed on two boards, the two agreed within 10%. Stripe, Twilio, GitLab, Salesforce and Reddit read the same everywhere. The honest version of this page is a description of what our pipeline captures, and that is genuinely useful, but it is a smaller claim than the one we made.
What this means if you are reading job postings
The practical advice survives the correction and gets stronger. A very short listing is not an employer telling you the job has no requirements. It is a listing that cannot contain them, and the full posting very likely exists somewhere else, frequently on the employer's own careers page. Go and read that one before you decide anything about pay, level or requirements. What changes is who to blame: we cannot tell you it is the job board's doing, because at least twice now the short version was on the employer's own site and the gap was introduced by the software reading it. Ours.
How we measured it (and what we did not claim)
Corpus figures come from a 20% systematic sample of 257,534 active postings on 2026-08-16, plus a full pass over employers with at least 40 active postings on two or more sources. The correction itself is not a corpus query: it is five JPMorgan URLs taken from our own corpus and opened directly, plus the stored text for one of them quoted in full above. Two limits stated plainly. First, we have not established for every short source whether the shortness is a feed limit, a summary field, or a page our scraper handles badly, so we describe the effect and not the cause. Second, our own storage caps descriptions at 5,000 characters, so the long end of every distribution here is censored and this page still publishes no claim about which source is most thorough. We are NOT claiming job boards carry full text faithfully, and we are NOT claiming employers write short postings. We are claiming, now, only what we can support: this is what our corpus holds, and where we have checked, it holds less than the source did.
Frequently asked questions
Why do some job postings have almost no description?
In our corpus, 9.5% carry under 500 characters. We previously blamed job boards for that; at least twice the short version turned out to be on the employer's own site, and the gap was introduced by our own pipeline reading a summary field instead of the body. So the honest answer is that a short listing usually means the full posting is somewhere else, and often on the employer's careers page.
Did this page change?
Yes. It claimed JPMorgan Chase publishes 120 characters on one board and over 5,000 on another, and concluded the channel decides what a candidate sees. The 120-character source is JPMorgan's own careers portal, which shows a candidate the full posting. That comparison, the equivalent Apple one, and the conclusion drawn from them are withdrawn.
Should I trust a short job posting?
Treat it as a pointer rather than a description. It cannot contain a salary, a level or a requirement, so its silence tells you nothing. Find the same role on the employer's own careers page and read that before deciding.
Do job boards show less than the employer?
Sometimes, but we can no longer show it with the evidence we had, because our own reading of a page is confounded with what the page contains. What we can still say is that 14 of the 18 multi-board employers we measured looked the same on every board.
See where you stand
Upload your resume to see your skill gaps, match scores, and which roles fit your background.
Analyze my resumeRelated Data
We Analyzed 1,835 “Entry-Level” Job Postings. Most Still Demand Experience.
“Entry-level” / junior postings analyzed: 1,835
The Highest-Paid Skills in 2026, From 73,374 Job Postings That Disclosed Pay
Job postings we analyzed: 73,374
Backend Engineer Market: What 200,000 Job Listings Tell Us
Active backend roles: 24,600+
The 25 Fastest-Growing Skills in 2026 Job Postings
Jobs analyzed: 133,000+
Guides
Dataset & citation
- Dataset
- 257,534+ active job postings
- Collected
- 20% systematic sample plus direct fetches of JPMorgan job URLs, 2026-08-16; corrects figures published earlier the same day
- Last verified
- 2026-08-16
- Methodology
- How we measure
Suggested citation
SeekerScore. "Correction: We Blamed Job Boards for a Gap Our Own Reader Made Us Re-Check (2026 Data)." Analysis of 257,534+ job postings, 2026-08-16. https://www.seekerscore.com/insights/how-much-a-posting-tells-you-2026
Data derived from Seeker's job corpus of 257,534+ listings across multiple sources. Updated 2026-08-16. Individual results vary based on resume content, target market, and role specifics.