Stenonymous and Christopher Day ARE NOT in Control of WUNCRA or Steno Imperium!

It has come to my attention that a member of the community was told that I am the author of Steno Imperium. This caused that member of the community to believe that I had done things that I did not do.

Let me be clear: I am not in control of WUNCRA or Steno Imperium. Both authors write anonymously. My name is clearly printed under all of my articles — Christopher Day.

Please be aware that if you falsely tell someone that I control either of those websites, and you cause someone damage, and that causes me reputation or monetary damage, I may very well have a cause of action against you for libel or slander. People know that when they write me their information is kept safe and not divulged to others unless they want it to be, with rare exceptions when I am investigating stuff as a “citizen journalist.” Damaging the unique brand I bring to the table is unacceptable to me, and I will seriously consider any and all means of defending it.

Stenonymous is a name synonymous with trust. Don’t violate that trust by lying about who I am and what I do.

Thank you.

Tips for Publishing Without Consequences

I get away with publishing pretty much anything I want. It’s something I’m proud of and really promote because I feel our field will grow stronger by having discussions and having things out in the open. That said, with this power comes some responsibility, so I’m going to share some of the thought processes that help keep me away from endangering my career so that others who follow might avoid the pitfalls of free speech.

1. Personal situation is important. One of the reasons I started Stenonymous was because government workers have some free speech protections. The large court reporting businesses had no power over me because my money is made completely independently from them. Freelancers have a hard time in this regard. There’s no protection and agencies have actively tried to cause trouble for them in the past. So the first thing to do before publishing is to take stock of your personal situation and imagine the pros and cons of speaking out. Sometimes speaking through someone else, as many people have done by corresponding with me and sharing information, is safer.

2. Details are important. Free speech protections aside, talking about your workplace could pose a problem. In general, don’t publish about the specific cases you work on, the court you work for, or the sensitive things you do in the course of your official duties. For example, I am free to absolutely trash California courts and policies if I want to. Doing the same in my backyard could be problematic. Keep in mind, it may limit career mobility to trash a lot of different places, so it may be undesirable to trash places in your publishing if you may uproot and move there in the future. This is why I don’t trash Kentucky. If the ocean ever swallows New York City I need Migliore & Associates to hire me.

3. Truth is important. The things you publish should be truthful. Truth is a defense to defamation and anyone is allowed to sue for any reason. Any of you could sue me right now in my hometown with a complaint that says “Chris Day is a bad man and owes me a million dollars.” You wouldn’t win, but the point stands, truth is a strong lawsuit deterrent.

4. Fair use is important. Take care if what you publish is copyrighted. All creative works are copyrighted upon creation. There is some wiggle room in the fair use doctrine where things created for parody, education, debate, commentary, etc, may allow the use of copyrighted material.

5. Have a backup to explain antisocial behavior. Most neoliberals back up their psychotic behavior by saying things like “it’s just business.” Usually as they’re firing single moms and stuff like that. My personal out is that I have adopted a performative media style called the “dirtbag left” style. This helps people reconcile my very mellow and polite in-person self with my more loud and visible media persona.

6. Punch up. People and organizations with wealth and power are far better targets for commentary. If they hit back, they’re the big bully preying on you for exercising your free speech rights. If they do nothing, they look weak to those that follow you, consume your content, or agree with your points.

7. Find a niche. The big money types are correct when they talk about business ecosystems and companies’ roles in those ecosystems. Free speech, power of the press, and general sharing and distribution of information are part of ecosystems too. Publishing is about finding your niche in the ecosystem. For example, there are people like Shaunise Day, Stephanie Hicks, Denee Vadell, and the Stenoholics. Like me, they’re all content creators. They make amazing stuff. But we don’t fill the same niches. I present analyses of and commentary on our field along with populating search engines with articles and images that counter the corporate narrative. Shaunise creates conventions that make me wish I wasn’t an introvert. Stephanie and Denee make videos that outclass anything I’ve ever made in my entire life. If I had the money, my new niche would probably be syndicating our stenographic media and pumping it out to the world (and getting our content creators paid.) The point is, whatever you do, be original or do things better, it’ll get your content more exposure and be more impactful.

8. Pay your taxes. Make sure to claim any income from your publishing hustle, even if it’s somehow expensed on a schedule C or something like that. Your rivals might just report you to the IRS if they see your content attracting real dollars.

9. Use personal attacks sparingly. Most of my publishing is about the conduct of corporations and not so much focused on the individuals that work for those businesses. If you’re going after somebody, you really want to have a firm grasp on why you’re doing it, because you may have to explain your conduct to a friend, follower, or employer.

10. Have fun and stay calm. Publishing comes with risks. People can sue, talk about you behind your back, or even openly trash you. It’s very advantageous to take on a nihilistic “nothing really matters” approach to the world in this regard. For example, I’ve put it out there again and again that given enough funding this blog will grow its media footprint and push the agenda of working reporters harder than anybody else has in the last 50 years. It ultimately doesn’t matter whether the funding comes through because I believe in what I’m doing and the information that I publish helps people. Money is a means to an end and not an objective. Similarly, it’s advantageous to have a mission behind what you do, because it will keep you going even when the funding takes a nosedive. Flip side of that, don’t become too obsessed with your mission, because if something comes along that stops you from achieving your objectives, you want to keep good mental health. If you’re not ready mentally for the potential consequences, it’s okay to walk away from a creative or content-generating project.

You’ve got my book of tricks. The First Amendment is our strongest card against an inert government and corporate corruption. Go build something better.

Stenonymous Receives Demand for Correction & Apology from Naegeli

Last night at about 10:00 p.m., I received an e-mail from Richard Hunt of Barran Liebman LLP about Naegeli. It was a fairly standard legal threat, not that I know what those look like, since I’ve never received one before. If you’re short on time, skip their nonsense and read my reply.

The demand letter is available for download here:

Richard Hunt Letter to Stenonymous Download

Now, I understand that this kind of thing may have a chilling effect on the free speech I have worked so hard to promote in our industry. I must ask all of you not to be afraid, but to turn to your state and federal legislators and law enforcement. Take this opportunity to share with them what is happening. I will lead by example in defense of our collective futures. I will be brave as I am asking all of you to be.

The PDF download and plain text is below.

Letter to Richard Hunt from Christopher Day Download

Dear Mr. Hunt:

I’ll assume you’re an honest lawyer roped into this circus by your corporate client. Welcome. Make sure you’re sitting for this one.

This is my show. Defamation is a false statement of fact published to a third party that causes damage. Naegeli’s reputation is so awful that I find it hard to believe there’s anything that could be said that would damage its reputation further. Some of the statements I make are factual, and truth is an affirmative defense to defamation. Beyond that, some of the statements I make are an opinion based on my expertise as a stenographic court reporter for the last 11 and a half years and creator of what is indisputably the largest blog in my industry. You do not have a cause of action and therefore it would be legally wrong for you to file a complaint against me.

You should peruse my blog. I’ve been reporting corporate corruption against much larger corporations than Naegeli. Veritext and US Legal Support appear to be involved in a plot to rig the court reporting and stenotype services industry against consumers/lawyers. What was done to the healthcare industry as portrayed in the series Dopesick about Purdue Pharma is more or less being done to my industry. The difference here is that what is occurring in my industry is what would have happened if one doctor rallied the others to fight the misleading advertising and dishonest behavior. Conceded that the series is a dramatization of the actual events, of course. I have a moral obligation to stop the lies and dishonesty rampant in my field because of the damage this plot will likely do to my profession, its students, minority speakers, and testimony transcript accuracy. Once the public takes note and begins alerting the DOJ, FBI, and FTC as I have, there is virtually no chance the plot will continue. Naegeli’s gouging was such a minor and unrelated part of that, that in my wildest dreams, I couldn’t have imagined this kind of foolish overreaction and strategic blunder. Thank you.

My field is beset by silence and fear. I aim to break this. To achieve this I have become a goal-oriented person. You see, now that Naegeli has threatened to sue through an actual law firm, it’s put itself in a much worse position than anyone could have conceived. Now Naegeli has two choices. It can fail to sue me, and show an entire field of nearly 30,000 court reporters that it is a scared barking dog, which will embolden them. The competition from all of them will become so fierce that it will run the company into the ground. Alternatively, Naegeli could sue. I am quite sure that I can find a valid counterclaim. We can lock each other in for a lawsuit and give this field the show it never knew it needed. It will be the single-largest destruction of capital the industry has ever seen and your client’s reputation will drop even more as court reporters across the nation realize that money could’ve gone into advertising to fix the stenographer shortage. Imagine the backlash. “Yes, I could’ve spent $400 an hour advertising this profession but instead I, Naegeli & Co., have decided the money is better spent stifling Christopher Day’s free speech.”

I know the latter seems like an attractive choice, but it will only expand my audience exponentially and possibly allow me to run daily ads decrying Naegeli’s hatred of free speech and the stenographic free press. I took a personality test recently, and it claimed I was a mediator. Perhaps unsurprisingly, I have come up with a third option. I can use my media personality to completely rehabilitate Naegeli’s reputation. We can sign a contract that Naegeli will use only stenographers and/or voice writers, and will shift their billing model to be the more open and honest “split of invoice” method. I’ll take $100,000 for up to two dozen press releases or media actions in 2022. Together, we will find a way to repair Naegeli’s image in the eyes of the public and court reporters across the nation. We can donate 5% of the contract to NCRF and 5% of the contract to Open Steno to show the field our resolve and unity.

I have about $1,200 to my name and am about $20,000 in debt. You see, the corporations in my field looted it so much by the time I got here that as a young man, I simply didn’t have a fair shot. I let you know that in order to explain that in the event you sue and somehow manage to bribe a judge and/or jury to see things your way, you will have succeeded in little more than obtaining a piece of paper called a judgment that says “you win, congrats.” Meanwhile, the work I am doing will ensure that not a single stenography grad ever has to suffer like that again. If you believe there is any universe where I will back down, there is an ancient stenographic proverb designed just for you.

TKPWHRUBG.