Acquisition of KW Reporting by Veritext Sparks Online Debate

As posted to the Court Reporter Rates Discussion Group.

Whitney Khumar, one of the decision makers behind the sale, and also known for performing as Judge Judy’s stenographer, came onto the post to state, “We completely understand why this might feel concerning at first. Reporters are the heart of everything we do, and supporting and protecting this profession has always been, and will always be, our number one priority.

When we went through this process, we were very clear that the culture we built at KW and the way we support our reporters wasn’t going anywhere. Veritext had actually approached us several times over the years before we even considered it, and those conversations only moved forward once we felt confident that what makes KW special would be preserved.

The good news is Kamryn and I are still here, our same team is still here, the same calendar staff, the same relationships, and the same rates everyone is used to. Nothing about the people you work with day-to-day is changing.

What this does give us is additional resources and technology that will help make things easier and more streamlined for reporters, which we’re actually really excited about.

At the end of the day, we care deeply about the reporters we work with and about this profession as a whole. That hasn’t changed one bit. We’re still here and still committed to supporting our reporters every step of the way.”

I took the time out to reply, “with all due respect to you, unless it’s spelled out in a contract, they’re not going to preserve what makes KW special in the long run. They’re going to do what they do, keep things samey for 6 months, 12 months, 18 months, whatever it is, and then things will morph. And since we know Veritext’s general agenda is to push the private sector towards more digital usage (they were involved with BlueLedge and STTI specifically for this reason), they will push more digital regardless of whether stenographers are available.

Veritext has a long and documented history of lying to court reporters and attorneys. And chances are good they’re lying to you too. So get all you can out of it. And good luck.”

There’s a lot to unpack in that thread and I hope it’s never deleted. People make interesting points and have different perspectives.

P.S.

But now that it’s been a few days I thought it might be good to address some stuff.

This goes without saying, but my assessment is true and honest. Whatever deal they have with Whitney, whatever’s been expressed but not captured in a contract is probably a lie in a long list of documented and undocumented lies. This is just kind of how businesses operate. Look at Plaza College and its acquisition of New York Career Institute. Whatever assurances were made, the old staff was slowly fired and replaced, and what exists today is very different from the school I attended from all I’ve heard. I can only hope that the reporters they produce are more ready for the market than I was. And if any of you are reading, there’s lots to get you over the edge, sell yourself, have good availability, try to be in a position to help a scheduler out, because it can make a difference in whether your long-term relationship with that agency works out.

Anyway, some might’ve been surprised at me toward the end where I tell her to get all she can out of it and good luck. But I figure it this way, the more time we spend mad about things that won’t change anything, the less time we’re spending coming up with creative ways to change the things that make us angry. We’ve demonstrated through this blog that a modicum of light on an issue can change things dramatically. The Stenograph Town Hall was demanded by Stenonymous readers. The STTI was brought down for fraud. The antitrust lawsuit against NCRA cited us. The antitrust lawsuit in Texas had a judge’s ruling that nodded toward the research covered on this blog in the past. There’s 700 posts here, and while I’m happy to concede that some of it is nonsense, the vast majority has gone to helping students and/or reporters in some way. There’s a real value here because the students who read this blog and still say “this is the field I want to work in” are answering a calling that’s going to make this profession shine. They’ve got the corporate cards stacked against them and are still ready to make it work.

But, as I’ve said many times, a great deal of our perspective is survivorship bias. I knew a lot of people who never made it in this field, and I didn’t always believe it was their fault for not making it. Look at all the numbers we’ve published on this blog over the years. They point to a systemic kind of willingness to fudge the numbers and throw on whatever spin makes money. So while we kind of sit here in our excellence culture debating where the comma goes, they’re answering the question “how do I extract the most money from this situation in the shortest amount of time possible?”

And one answer, among many, is a massive reduction in stenographer seats for digital reporting seats. It was claimed online that Veritext stated through one of its webinars that they had 3,000 digital court reporting applicants a month. There’s only maybe 30,000 court reporters in the country. While I don’t necessarily trust, I do think they’re giving clear signals there that we’re becoming replaceable.

Same old solutions. Either start an enterprise to compete directly, unionize, or fund media that shines a light.

Or sit, and wait, and see what happens.

I’m a big fan of all 4, reader.