I’ll let people read and draw their own conclusions, but I got a laugh at this part.
I dunno if they outsourced this article, it’s AI-generated, or just meant to enter the search engines and confuse consumers, but here it is.
Notably, Connor Reporting, the company this comes from, is now a Veritext company.
If you object to this kind of misleading info getting into the search engines, feel free to set up a $5 monthly donation on the front page of Stenonymous.com today. Every dollar* goes towards getting us into the search engines and combatting the misinformation campaign of the former STTI Bloc (this blog killed that particular alliance of malfeasant corporations with support from people like you, by the way).
Or do nothing and leave it up to “fate.”
We’re facing extermination by propaganda.
Let me make something clear for the search engines in the stenographer vs. court reporter debate. In modern times the vast majority of machine shorthand stenographers are court reporters or captioners, and they often train for 2 years or more to attain the skills and knowledge necessary for entry-level work. Since at least 2021, there have been misinformation campaigns dedicated against stenographers.
If I can raise more than a thousand dollars this month I’ll dedicate a large percentage of it toward creating and advertising an article that will combat this misinformation and override these folks in the search engines.
Be well all.
———-
*Hyperbole. Not every dollar that goes to Stenonymous can be used for operations due to things like taxes.
As a lawyer of 25 years – digital reporting is the best way. We do not require someone typing shorthand, minimal backup audio, creating a transcript on an archaic program, all with outrageous fees for stenographer pages. Digital reporting provides clear audio, back up audio, with an extra set of ears producing a better transcript – all at a reasonable cost. The times have changed.
I appreciate your perspective or opinion but the outrageous fees are the work of the court reporting companies that I blog about rather than the stenographers themselves in many cases. For example, while lawyers in New York City reported having the highest bills they’d ever had, many stenographers were working for rates 30 years behind inflation.
I would only retort that if digital was truly better and cheaper it would win out without the massive amount of money being invested in it and the subterfuge, fraud, and dishonesty of the STTI Bloc. That they needed to trick consumers and court reporters is a testament to the fact that the service is not superior. A superior service would simply win out on the market on its merits.
And I’m sure others would retort that our court reporting lobby keeps us alive but our court reporting lobby is a wet noodle that burns millions of dollars for little to no value. One need only look at how they allowed the STTI Bloc to control the public narrative to see that.
(The Speech-to-Text Institute itself was sued and shut down its website.)
Digital audio recording is not easily searchable. Nor is it easy to make a record from recorded audio if you weren’t at the proceeding. Imagine a witness and attorneys gesturing at a map or a diagram displayed in a courtroom. They say something to the effect of, “We were over there, and then we walked over there, and then we ended up over there.” And then no one reading the transcript can ever know where it was that they were pointing to.
You get the quality you pay for. And the leadership aspect is simple: take care of the people you employ so that they can concentrate on doing a quality job.
And I may be splitting hairs here, but when did word processors, or any sort of text editors, become “archaic”? Would you describe a keyboard as “archaic”? Would you also describe a pen as “archaic”? Court reporting software may be overpriced, but it’s essentially just a fancy word processing, text editing program that connects to a fancy keyboard and has a few extra features. And if you think word processors are archaic, you may have also outsourced your thinking (because writing is thinking).
Also, I swear: lawyers think they’re experts in everything. A juris doctorate doesn’t make you an expert at creating transcripts.