A Stenonymous source passed me some transcript excerpt.
I think this shows that it’s becoming more and more understood that digital is an issue. Particularly looking at the Testifying While Black study, where we learned stenographers were twice as good at the AAVE dialect as laypeople. Who are the corps recruiting the transcribers from? It shows our training methods are better for equality. And given enough funding, we could close that 20% gap that we have.
The agencies face a pressing problem of brain drain. If all the smart potential digitals are jumping to stenography, voice writing, or avoiding the field entirely, those remaining will sink the business model and earn it its deserved reputation for harming court record accuracy.
Don’t these folks have a fiduciary responsibility to make the shareholders’ shares worth more and not potentially collapse the whole thing by making a wild bet against the current market conditions? I suppose it doesn’t make a difference to private equity flippers if what they’re doing looks good on paper. But eventually paper meets reality, and the reality is digital court reporting is bad for business.
A reader asked for the certification page and I was able to procure it. I was once told by a digital that they were trained to obfuscate. That’s kind of how I feel on this one. It says it’s a true record of her notes. But if it’s digital, aren’t the notes mere annotations?
Please don’t let anything I’ve written communicate an opinion about Dalia Solomon. Don’t know her. Assume the best. But the concerns about digital use in general still stand.