Tag: NCRA

National Court Reporters Association AI Position Statement

The National Court Reporters Association has released the following.

National Court Reporters Association AI Position Statement
Statement from the National Court Reporters Association President regarding the organization’s AI Position Statement

While I commend the organization for such an uplifting message, I can’t help but point out that it sidesteps some very important issues.

Veritext and the big money brigade have all heavily invested in digital reporting. This will lead to the loss of stenographer seats in the private sector and exacerbate shortages in the public sector. As our number dwindles, so too does our bargaining power on the market. And with the digital brigade proclaiming that digital is realtime, it’s foreseeable that realtime rates will go down. The only unknown is time scale. Meanwhile, as corporate consolidation continues, corporate ability to set rates will strengthen. Game, set, match.

Let’s not forget Tyler Technologies’s recent acquisition of FTR. They’ve got a hell of a lot more money than Veritext and it’s pretty clear they intend to push AI. And NCRA as an organization purged the association of volunteers that were most concerned with AI and digital inadequacy. So what is the organization going to actually do to catch the ears of legislators and court officials and ensure they’re not fooled by flashy demos and sweet-talking salesmen? These are nice words. But there is no apparent plan. That means fewer jobs going to stenographers and fewer members for NCRA. That means that eventually NCRA may someday have to open up its membership to voice and digital to survive or die. Or it’ll become a corporate puppet if it’s not already a corporate puppet. After all, the organization lied to its members with regard to the legality of discussing rates for decades, and that helped agency owners, not working reporters.

I can’t help but feel our whole guardian of the record thing is a facade. We stress about nonsensical, almost meaningless moments like the placement of a comma, but we never developed as a group the skills required to communicate to the country our value. Sometimes I’m dumbstruck thinking about how many millions of dollars were flushed down the toilet over the years. Dollars that could’ve gone to preserving your jobs and enhancing leadership skills across the board.

I look back at past endeavors wondering if it was all for nothing. Maybe the rank and file working reporter doesn’t need to learn such skills. But our leaders and institutions spent their time trying to dissuade the corporate scumbags from being corporate scumbags with the anti-gifting, anti-contracting, and the realtime is the future push. Guardians? We weren’t even a speed bump. We said to them, and still say today, “take it all, take the whole market, because you have the money, so you dictate the terms.” These are entities that have asked reporters to change transcripts for their clients. These are entities that allegedly steal from their own employees. The record is in danger. We are currently losing and it doesn’t have to be that way. I proved that half a decade ago.

This all to explain why it became clear to me that the NCRA is not equipped to handle the challenges of our time. The willpower isn’t there. It’s never been. It never will be. The truth might be too stressful for some of us, and that’s okay. For the rest of us, forming something that pushes back independent of NCRA is imperative.

Maybe a publication that rivals the Journal of Court Reporting and draws eyes from outside the profession. Just a thought I had some time ago.

Stenonymous readership statistics released February 27, 2026

National Court Reporters Association 2024 990 Filing Now Available

2024 snapshot:

NCRA 990 – 2024Download

In the past I’ve written about how easy it might be to bribe our leaders.

I’ve also noted that, even where there’s no proof of corruption, the current Executive Director of the National Court Reporters Association, Dave Wenhold, either personally or through his management company, runs lots of associations. So many that some might say it could impact the amount of time spent on our national association’s issues.

And so I’ll add today that it’s sort of comical that, at least in 2024, expenses went over revenue by almost exactly what Wenhold’s salary / pay is. 4.93M expenses. 4.6M revenue. And Wenhold’s payment? 0.3M.

And yeah, I get the whole song and dance that this is the guy who can run an association of this size. But, you know, so was Jim Cudahy at one point, and we all saw how that turned out with the Speech-to-Text Institute.

I stand by what I said in the corruption article. We should send our own people to association management training and have one of us steering the ship. The consolidation of too much power in one person is a dangerous thing. We had the good sense to write term limits into NCRA’s constitution and bylaws. Why, then, do we consolidate, year after year, one man’s power over the organization? Don’t get me wrong, I’m not saying we need to flip the seat every year. But after half a decade of frozen/falling revenue and a fairly stagnant membership count, and a man that’s been involved with the court reporting profession for 17 years or more, isn’t it time to try a new approach?

Critical thinking demands the question at least pass through the minds of the Board of Directors.

National Court Reporters Association Files Reply In Support of Motion to Dismiss Antitrust Complaint

The official music track for this post is here.

Some time ago I consulted with a law firm about the tying of the National Court Reporters Association’s certifications to its membership, possibly in violation of antitrust laws. I’m not privy to what happened afterwards except that they apparently found plaintiffs and are attempting to move forward with a class action. I got my hands on NCRA’s reply in support of the motion to dismiss and I’ve decided to share it.

Having only read a sliver of it, I must say it’s comical that they call the membership and certification inseparable. Anybody with a few brain cells can see that it’d be easy to separate out the testing and CEUs from the membership. The NCRA simply doesn’t want to because it would cost them money. I’m hopeful that the court sees through such a ruse and the lawsuit survives the pleading stage, because at that point they’ve boxed themselves into a corner of “yes, our membership is tied to certification [in violation of antitrust law.]”

I have no reservations about where I stand. In the question of institutional loyalty versus loyalty to my fellow court reporters, I choose my fellow court reporters. And I’ll clip a comment from Facebook that lays out some of what I think of when I think of NCRA.

This refers to Jim Cudahy leaving NCRA to return under the Speech-to-Text Institute years later, the fact that Dave Wenhold manages probably a dozen organizations and therefore by definition cannot be invested in court reporting in the way we need him to be at this critical moment, the decline of court jobs on NCRA’s watch, and the decades-old lie that court reporters cannot discuss rates.

There is a certain cult-like thinking in court reporting where we believe in people and organizations that are clearly failing us. This is due in large part to propaganda. Being something of a propaganda expert that has used propaganda to tell the truth and raise consumer awareness, I must point out that if we do not break free from this de facto mind control, we will collectively walk off a cliff that there’s no climbing back from.

I must point out that with the kind of funding court reporters pour into the NCRA and Dave Wenhold’s pocket, Stenonymous could disrupt corporate propaganda dragging down your incomes, and has proven that in the past through the annihilation of the Speech-to-Text Institute, a venture that was backed by all the biggest names in the business including Stenograph and Veritext — and a direct threat to the prevalence of machine shorthand reporting.

I must point out that you can make a donation today on the front page of Stenonymous.com.

If change from within is not forthcoming, change from without is the only path forward.

P.S. Trey, if you happen to be reading, I know I still owe you a post. Life got in the way. I’ll be working on it sometime soon.

National Court Reporters Association to Exclude Non-Members From NCRA Social Media Groups

Court reporting has a huge Facebook presence. The National Court Reporters Association is acutely aware of this and has lots of different Facebook groups catering to the different types of reporters.

(Sorry to all the CART writers that don’t like being lumped into the reporter umbrella.)

Some of the NCRA social media groups are pictured

There’s no secret that the National Court Reporters Association has, overall, been bleeding members, with more expected losses forecasted to about 2030 thanks to the retirement cliff and the expansion of digital reporting by the larger corporations. This is in addition to people burned by the organization in one way or another who leave voluntarily, like yours truly.

So imagine my surprise when it was announced they’d be culling non-members from their groups.

An announcement by NCRA in the CART group
An announcement by NCRA in the scopists and proofreaders group

This selective inclusivity is precisely what’s killing the organization. If you want people to be excited about membership, excited about the organization, excited about joining and making a difference, you engage with them. You can’t engage with people you exclude. Why in the world would we exclude non-members from these spaces if there’s nothing nefarious going on?

Who knows? Maybe there is something nefarious going on. The NCRA does have that antitrust suit filed against it after all.

For better or worse, I’ve always allowed open engagement in my Stenonymous group and on this website. I take the time to answer and like almost every comment. You can trust my brand to be open and honest. Why can’t you trust your national association to be the same?

To be honest, if you ever wanted a place to spend the $300 wasted on membership dues, Stenonymous would be a good bet. I engage with news reporters to spread information about the field. I report accurately, openly, and faithfully on industry news, concepts, ideas. It wouldn’t really be all that hard to get some lobbying going if I had significant buy-in from the community. And then what does NCRA provide besides the certifications? And it probably wouldn’t be all that hard to get a certification program going under a slimmer organization with bylaws that don’t violate the antitrust laws. After all, I have good relations with people that have instituted the New York State Court Reporters Association certification program. Yes, I would have to give up the blogging and the wild man approach to politics, but I’d make it work.

You ever want a new association dedicated to stenographers, I’m your guy. But I can’t do it for free. I would need enough reserve cash to safely leave my job and do what really quite honestly needs to be done in this field — NCRA needs stiff competition. (Stenograph too!)

To all the NCRA members reading, don’t let your leaders lead you off a cliff. Don’t watch them burn your dues with their poor decisions. Demand inclusivity or get out of the club before it crumbles. Imagine the possibilities. Take control of your destiny.

Sometimes the path of least resistance isn’t the smartest choice. Sometimes the way forward is through.

Court Reporter Shortage Fraud Media Teaser Email

…with love to Joshua Edwards, who also supported me throughout.

“I’m flexible on timeline. My method of documenting everything wasn’t the best looking back. But whose would have been?

I think big picture though, The Speech-to-Text Institute was this group of powerful corps (Veritext, et al.) that came together to propagandize the field and sell digital reporting. They used an outdated industry forecast (Ducker Report) and pushed out information with no adjustment for current industry initiatives (Project Steno, Open Steno, NCRA A to Z). I published about the fraud they were committing. They got sued (Trey Perez), shut down their website, and never bothered to defend themselves in court. Ultimately the court reporter shortage fraud was a little bit of truth, the retirement cliff and localized shortages, mixed with big lies about not being able to fill the gap with stenographers by corporations that had a financial interest in not filling the gap. To this day the fraud claims have not been seriously disputed by anyone of note. The worst I get is people that clearly haven’t read anything I’ve published who want to school me on how the shortage is real. It’s real, but it was exaggerated and exacerbated by the biggest names in the industry to sell digital. That’s the bottom line. 

And beyond my role in it, being willing to document and publish what others couldn’t for whatever reasons, I think the story of the people that supported me really should be told. Because in the end it wasn’t just me. There were others that chose not to be named. There were people like Jackie Mentecky that came right out and vouched for the correctness of what I’d published. I owe them all in a way I’ll never be able to repay. To this day, I have people that were duped into legal transcription or digital reporting that tell me they found my stuff and want to switch over to steno. We have people realizing they’re misclassified employees on a scale never seen in this industry. So our efforts have not been in vain. I suppose from a certain point of view we’re winning because the larger corps can’t dispute anything without calling more attention to it all.

Interested in seeing what you can do.”

Interview of Trey Perez by Cheri Marks

( ADDENDUM: The plain text version is showing up crazy on my website. Give me some time to figure it out. )

(Unedited PDF):

Trey Perez Interview (1)Download

“Are we working together, or are we working against each other?”
Cheri Marks speaks to Trey Perez

CM
Would you mind starting by giving me a little background about yourself, where you’re from, and how you initially came to be involved with court reporting issues?
TP
My name is Trey Perez, and I’m a videographer from Texas and Central Texas. I have an
associate’s degree in video technology. I want to make movies, but I got into the legal video business, and did that for 25 years. In 2019, I noticed there was a shortage of court reporters because of jobs that would be canceled.
CM
Could I back you up a little bit? How exactly does legal videography work?
TP
Sure. Back then it was separate. The attorneys would call the videographer, and then they would also call in a court reporter. The court reporting firms didn’t really handle a video then. They were strictly stenography. So in 2019 I got the idea to work on an app that would lay down the foundation of the transcript.
CM
Was there a defining moment that propelled you to design the stenography app? Or were you just watching the relationship between stenographers and videographers and sensing that it was inefficient?
TP
There’s a couple of different factors. One was the shortage of stenographers, and videographers losing jobs because of that. Then these companies, when there wasn’t a court reporter available, would hire us to go do video only depositions. One company in particular, Veritext, had a login which they wanted you to write down the times and objections etc. And so you would have this extra work to do. And I’m not very good at keeping notes. And so I had this friend of mine working on a website. He’s a very talented developer. And I told him about this situation and he developed the app for me. That’s why I created it, so that I could just take notes. By pressing a button, the speaker would change, it would designate who’s who. And that’s just how it started off.
CM
Do you think they initially were trying to cut corners and save money by having you do both the work of videographer and stenographer?
TP
No, I think there was a shortage. My understanding of the way it worked back then, was that the app would help the court reporter with her job, so that she could go back afterwards and listen to the audio, and know exactly where to go when listening for objections. They wanted us to take hand-written notes! The idea of having some sort of app that could simplify the process of finding objections seemed that it would just make the whole thing easier.
CM
Can you tell me how you got involved in the related antitrust lawsuits? How did you become aware of the criminality, and what were your first moves?
TP
The first thing was having a grievance filed against me by the president of the Court Reporters Texas Court Reporters Association. She’d sent me an email. And I was already getting little cryptic messages and things and telling me I was doing illegal things–
CM
By developing your app or by paying attention to–?
TP
By developing an app. That pissed off the court, big time. And so a grievance was filed against me.
CM
And what was the basis for the grievance?
TP
They said that I was trying to do court reporting.
CM
But isn’t that what they’d essentially asked you to do?
TP
When I came up with my app, I could produce a transcript easier and cheaper than the court reporters, but that wasn’t my intent. My intent was to offer it to them, and I did offer it to them. But no one would do business with me. It didn’t hurt the court reporting firms that the court reporters were upset with me. But still, they used the roar of the court reporters to shut me down. It was a tool to help the court reporters. And all the evidence will show that. It did change for me at one point, when there was no work left and my business was destroyed. By then I was just trying to make a living. But I did say that people could take a deposition without a court reporter, because everyone else was doing it! I never did this on my own. I never once built out a video-only deposition without a reporter unless the court reporting firm asked me to. So how can that be illegal?
CM
Right. And can you tell me then how it moved from you having a grievance filed against you to you being involved in that antitrust lawsuit from one to the next?
TP
For the grievance, I represented myself and it was dismissed. And then they appealed that dismissal and I got to speak again and they dismissed it again for the second time. And that’s their own body that governs the court reporting firms and the court reporters. But at that point, my business was devastated. There was so much evidence because the court reporters would taunt me on social media. They would post pictures or taunting videos along with my name, or make snide, thinly-veiled insults in my direction. So that pissed me off. Just the audacity: that I can’t even work now because I was developing a tool.
CM
It seems tragic, because presumably you and the stenographers shouldn’t even be the ones fighting. It seems like you both have a common enemy, which is these huge corporations that don’t have working people’s interests in mind.
TP
I tried to work with the court reporters here in Austin. I contacted a few, individual court reporters and asked them: what’s more important, your family or your career? Because it’s going to be a 20 billion dollar industry soon, and no one will be able to compete with that. I was trying to get the court reporters to come on board, and every time I talked to them, I said, we weren’t trying to replace court reporters. We were just trying to help out with the situation. They can deny it, but here in Texas, court reporters were getting 500 bonuses to up and leave a job they were supposed to do, if they got a better offer that same day.
CM
Geez. Do you feel like your reputation was smeared a bit unfairly?
TP
Oh, yeah, Most definitely. There’s a lot of rumors. It’s been difficult because when you don’t have any money, it’s hard to get representation.
CM
Are you still embroiled in the lawsuit, or are you past it at this point?
TP
I’m still involved. We’ve had really bad rulings, let’s put it that way. The name of my company was called Depo Notes, the notes of the deposition. And so the judge ruled that, in my case,
that in my hands, that it was illegal. Check this out. So when I couldn’t find work, I started doing landscaping and mowing grass. And I would go into different neighborhoods to do this. So then when I’m cutting grass, there’s these certain people who keep coming around, riding their bikes around me and, like, making racialized judgements about me. I could just sense that, you know, with the political climate here in Texas, all this talk about “getting rid of illegal people” – and then here I have a judge telling me that I can’t use my tool, my app that I developed, and it’s illegal in my hands. Then when I go out to cut grass, I have this person wondering if I’m illegal or not.
CM
Oh my God. That’s awful, I’m sorry. I feel like this is important, and I’m curious now– do you think there was institutional racism involved in your initial vilification?
TP
No, I think that the industry is 85% white, though. Here’s the thing, though. Why would a judge even be bringing up that AI could hurt minorities? I even wrote that in when my attorney wanted to leave. I wrote an objection to him leaving. I put that in there. That from the beginning this has been biased. And judges, I know they have court reporters that have been with them for many years. But for him to rule the way he’s ruled–it’s odd. What’s funny is that people that believe in the law, they say, yeah, the Constitution, the Constitution. But yet when their man tries to overthrow our government, they forget about the Constitution then.
CM
Absolutely.
TP
In my case, the judge said that for me to have this app was illegal because every deposition in Texas must be taken by a stenographic court reporter. But one of the biggest plaintiffs firms in Texas just put out an ad, and he does 98% of his job without a court reporter. And how do I know? Because I did some. And he came out with an ad saying that in the past four years, he’s given away $1 billion to his clients. He didn’t advertise that, of course, that he did it all without a court reporter.
CM
Do you feel like you were too primed for success and they wanted to quash you and take your ideas?
TP
No, it was because the firms themselves were worried. They were threatened by the app. But the court reporters are just worried about their jobs. Why didn’t they get on the court reporting firms that were hiring me asking me to do this? That’s who they should have been after.
CM
It’s easier to punch down than to punch up, right?
TP
Right. And I think that they thought I was just gonna go away, you know, and I’m not. Because
it’s hard to argue that the rules and laws apply to only me in this case. I don’t think they should be able to win.
CM
So when you win, you could very well be setting a legal precedent, perhaps, for this kind of case.
TP
That’s what I feel is going to happen.
CM
Is there an end in sight? Or is it one of those kind of entrenched legal things where it’s hard to
know when it’s going to end?
TP
It’s hard to know. And right now, I don’t have counsel. My attorney withdrew, and I don’t even
know why– “irreconcilable differences” he wrote. The real “differences” were that he wasn’t
willing to fight for me. We had even agreed that these rulings were wrong, but there was nothing he could do about it. It’s about the truth. That’s what we do is we take testimony down. And, you know, I know it’s a talent to be able to type fast, and that’s a skill and it’s worth some money. It has value. And. But when you don’t have that– because not every court reporter is the same– you could be greatly assisted by using this type of technology.
CM
What do you think about, the claims that AI has an inherent racism to it because of the people
that are building it and the speed at which it’s being kind of put into the world before being read
by an ethics committee, for example, or do you have any opinion on that?
TP
I think that a human being, at the end of the day, is the one that signs off. AI is not going to be
certifying itself. You would have someone reading [post trial, in this case] it and cleaning it up,
and we could be improving the performance of the tool in this way.
CM
You can check accuracy against AI instead of just giving over all the responsibility.
So at this point, have they shuttered your business and have they told you you’re not allowed to
reopen it, because it’s illegal?
TP
No. Once money stops coming in and work stops coming in for a couple years, your developer
gets pissed and, you know, those relationships don’t last. So development stops and then, you
know, then everything stops.
CM
I’m so sorry. Do you feel like you’ll have the drive at some point to develop a new app? Or are
you kind of done with it?
TP
I’m done with it, yeah. So this will be, understandably, my last fight. And that is to change the
way that I’ve asked this question on social media, on LinkedIn: can a deposition be taken in
Texas without a court reporter? Yes or no.
CM
Why are they afraid to say?
TP
Because if they say yes, then that helps my case. But if they say no, they’re lying, because
they’re doing it already.
CM
So, they’ve put you and court reporters between a rock and a hard place just to benefit this huge
Speech to Text Institute and these corporations that are developing the same software.
TP
When they filed a grievance against me, I spoke anyway. So the reporters are commenting on
this thread and they say: “He spoke at the meetings. He says he can’t find work. Says he’s basically been blackballed or boycotted”. And then the next person chimes “Hell yes, we did!” And another one writes “He bit the hand that fed him. He wanted to have his cake and eat it too.
Maybe if he would have stayed in his lane”…that kind of thing
CM
It’s really a shame. I wanted to ask you how you felt about Stenonymous’s previous coverage of
your lawsuits– and if you felt it was too focused on the speech to Tech Institute involvement.
TP
No, I just think that he’s biased and he’s on the side of the court reporters.
I haven’t done anything illegal. There is no evidence stating I did anything wrong. We were
never reprimanded for developing a tool, a tool that they’re actually using now.
CM
It seems like you’re just being bullied.
If that were to stop, could you see any opportunity for collaboration with court reporters
happening in the future, for example with sympathetic figures or outlets like Stenonymous?
TP
I don’t see it because it’s just been too much. You know, last time I went into the deposition, I got kicked out. So, I just don’t see it. You know, I’d walk in a room and I’d get this just look of
disdain. And then the court reporters got racist, too. You know, saying I was jealous of them. One lady, and her husband represents some of the court reporters that are defendants in this case, even went as low to repeat the racist stereotype, “most Hispanic men are short and have ego issues”
CM
That’s really awful, I’m sorry.
TP
So, they talk about how AI can be biased. But that lady just proved that a court reporter can be
biased as well. The court reporter is taking live deposition, and she’s biased right there in your
face.
CM
So what’s your best case scenario, both with the legal case and your own future and career?
TP
My end goal is to set a precedent here in Texas, and that’ll be my legacy. The testimony in
Texas will be able to be taken down by other means, not just stenographically. And it’ll be clear,
you know, because apparently there’s currently this gray area. I want it to be clear because
litigants should have a choice. That’s why I feel like I have a case. I’m gonna appeal. So they can be happy all they want, but it’s not over. It got personal.
CM
I look forward to hearing about your success with this case, and you setting the precedent.
TP
Did you hear about the case that was filed by the court reporters against the NCRA? It was on
Stenonymous– the court reporters filed a lawsuit against their association, antitrust as well.
Okay. So that brought up another topic: that videographers record the court. And the court could want our audio. And under the NCRA, if you’re a certified legal video specialist, you have to give it to them, that’s just courtesy. But the thing is, they’re suing the NCRA, the court reporters, because in order to become certified, and stay certified, a court reporter has to take these continuing education courses. And in order to do that, they have to have a membership with the NCRA. And so that’s why they’re saying that there’s an antitrust lawsuit there. They don’t have any competitors. And then the videographer would just have to give away his work product. And that’s a thing that I have an issue with now, because here I was getting blackballed. And then I’d go to a job and the court reporter would want my audio for free. And I’d be like, damn, are we working together or are we working against each other? They would say that we’re working together, but it didn’t seem that way…
CM
It seems like there’s a lot of elements at play here. Thank you for taking the time to talk to me
today. I wish you the best.
TP
Thank you

Bulletin: Lawsuit: The National Court Reporters Association Violated Antitrust Laws

My son is being born today so this’ll be a quick link.

The bottom line is that the tying of membership product to certification product is illegal under antitrust laws. NCRA is now being sued.

Maybe the board will realize whose watch this happened on.

Maybe it’s time for new leadership.

Wish me luck today. I will need it.

Addendum:

complaint.

NCRA later issued a statement

I just realized I was cited in the complaint thanks to my best friend.

P.S.

If ever my son should find this, mom and dad waited a long time for this day.

We love you. And we will love you forever.

I set these events you’re reading about in motion with the help of powerful people — and readers just like you.

And though I hope you will, like me, stand against injustice and the bullying of others when you are ready…

I want you to know that I will be happy no matter who you become.

I can’t wait to meet you.

NVRA President: NCRA STRONG and Stenographic Writers Can Join Us for Real Institutional Support!

From National Verbatim Reporters Association President Patrick Stephens:

Hello, reporting community!

For those of you that don’t know me, my name is Patrick Stephens. I have the pleasure of serving as the current president of the National Verbatim Reporters Association – no, the V is not for voice! The association strives to cater to the needs and wants of voice writers and machine writers alike. 

In the past few months, I’ve become aware of some concerns machine writers have regarding a committee they’ve poured a lot of their time, energy and hearts into, the STRONG Committee. I wanted to write a piece to let you know that your concerns did not fall on deaf ears at the NVRA.  First, presidents in most societies have the right to disassemble and rearrange committees that are NOT standing committees of a society. Removing a standing committee, though, requires the voice of the members, as it would constitute a Bylaws amendment, and, in a lot of instances, an amendment to an association’s Articles of Incorporation. Because of this, it is my belief that the NVRA’s Legislative Issues Committee would be the perfect place to work toward addressing these complicated and critical issues, as the committee reports to the entire NVRA Board of Directors and is not subject to removal on the wishes of one person.

“AI lacks the capacity for contextualization that humans possess.”

  • NCRA White Paper, 2023.

Who would understand this more so than the voice writer?  While voice writers use    Dragon Professional software, it is a tool, just like steno theory is a tool to produce the words. With these tools, there is always a human in control discerning and making sure that speech is transcribed correctly.   Speakers, homonyms, dialects, parentheticals and punctuation must be transcribed correctly, and nothing replaces the human mind as the only proven method that can do so. With a human, the transcript certification has been a single point of quality assurance, as the reporter swears that the transcript is a truly verbatim record.  Even if AI could certify a transcript, can we as humans truly trust it?  AI systems are owned by corporations; individual reporters are not. Most certifications tell the reader that court reporters are not financially tied to the parties involved in the case.  Furthermore, court reporters have an ethical obligation to tell parties if the deponent or parties in the case are related to them or if there is a conflict of interest. AI will have none of these responsibilities. 

Voice writers use voice codes, which are comparable to brief strokes and pen-writing. It is the same thing as a human being having control of steno strokes, which is a theory and a program just as a voice writer’s theory uses Dragon Professional, sometimes referred to as “oral stenography”.  Additionally, computer-aided transcription (CAT) software we all use aid the theory/method that we use. For machine steno, CAT software utilizes the theory to make words; for voice, the CAT software utilizes Dragon’s speech recognition engine to make words. 

In steno, a stroke is written, the stroke goes to the theory and looks for that specific stroke and selects the correct word; voice writers say a word, it goes to the speech recognition engine (Dragon) and makes an educated guess of what was said. *

If a machine writer makes the correct stroke, the right word will appear.  Because voice writers dictate to Dragon’s speech recognition engine, which is an imperfect AI, if a mistake is made, the voice writer can correct it in real-time and the correct word will appear.

“The leading speech recognition tools misunderstand Black speakers twice as often as white speakers,” wrote the research team. “To close the gap, we must create more linguistically diverse and inclusive datasets.”

  • NCRA White Paper, 2023.

I would argue that you should just use a court reporter. Accents and dialects are converted by the court reporter continuously and daily. The voice writer’s input in this context is critical for the AI to run effectively, given these differences in accents and dialects.  Any speech recognition engine is simply a program that will take sounds, run it through its vocabulary base and make an educated guess at the words you said.  

“Court reporters, whether practicing machine or voice stenography, have the opportunity to work together to protect the profession we love so much. Our ability to be the person to certify the record – not a transcriber from a far-off land or a computer algorithm – is one of our strongest selling points, not to mention real-time and read-backs! We have a duty to the record; we have certifications and ethical obligations we must meet to protect the record. Working together toward a common goal can build bridges and increase momentum toward greater understanding of what we do and why we love our profession.”

  • Tori Pittman, (Machine/Voice Writer – NVRA Education Committee & Director)

Of note is that only the machine writer and the voice writer pass certification exams at the same speeds, scores and test durations, with both national exams being validated by credentialing entities, and many states use these certifications as an entry requirement for licensure, what we’ve all come to know as reciprocity.  It’s time to combine our efforts in hopes for a better future for the students and working professionals we’ve come to know and support! 

In conclusion, voice and machine writers all know the ubiquity of artificial intelligence in this modern age. Voice and machine writers work around the flaws in automated speech recognition every day and are uniquely positioned to speak out on its pros and cons.

NVRA’s Legislative Issues Committee, a standing committee that cannot be disbanded by incoming presidents, is being given a new mission:  Court reporters of both modalities will come together to investigate and recommend legislative action that will ensure that technology is working for the communities we serve under the supervision and direction of certified court reporters only. We will work to build a coalition with other professionals concerned with the application of AI in their own fields, and together, make our voices heard.

Let this be a call to those ready to make a difference in the future of our profession.  The National Verbatim Reporters Association is prepared to give its committee and general members the institutional support needed to make changes to ensure that reporters reap the benefits of technology and that its harm is eliminated.


For more details and information regarding this committee of NVRA, feel free to E-mail us at legislation@nvra.org.  If you’re interested in membership, please visit us at NVRA.org.  Please note that if you’re an RPR seeking to join the NVRA, the deadline to submit your application for RPR reciprocity with the NVRA’s CVR needs to be received by December 31st, 2024.   Please E-mail nvramembership@nvra.org to begin this process.

From Christopher Day, Stenonymous.com:

I think this is a clear sign that everyone in the industry knows what was done to NCRA STRONG was wrong. I think the NVRA is willing to get behind its reporters, give an actual budget, and not mothball important initiatives. To my allies over at the National Court Reporters Association, consider picking up an NVRA membership today and getting involved. I see a real chance for change and an organization that’s willing to do what must be done to grow and create a healthy, enduring profession. This is also an opportunity to join a committee that cannot be easily disbanded, like Mr. Stephens made clear.

I offer this message for download below so that it may be shared more easily.

Docx:

Patrick Stephens MessageDownload

PDF:

Patrick Stephens MessageDownload

Bulletin: NVRA Cert v NCRA Cert, CVR v RPR, California

According to information from an NVRA insider, the California license is now obtainable if you have NVRA’s cert. RPRs don’t have this reciprocity via NCRA’s cert. A massive failure of the National Court Reporters Association and all the money spent on it.

Look at what you’re getting for your money with NCRA. Stenonymous does more advertising and search engine operations to end the shortage and call attention to court reporting. Protect Your Record Project does more advocacy in calling out the dishonesty of larger corporations. Now NVRA’s certification has an edge in one of the largest court reporting states in the country (and frankly, one of the largest GDPs in the world). All these smaller organizations seem to have more ability to impact the real world on the regular and for the regular working reporter. They do more for the people that believe in them and take part in them.

Maybe it’s time to slaughter the sacred cow called the National Court Reporters Association. We are starving while feeding a beast that never has enough money to do what has to be done while absorbing more money than any other player on the field.

NVRA has just made its membership that much more valuable. Take it or leave it, students and working reporters. I personally picked up a membership.

National Verbatim Reporters Association is ending its reciprocity for the RPR in a couple of months. The bottom line is that RPRs have low pass rates in California while CVRs tend to test well. The NVRA can no longer trust the NCRA’s cert, so it makes logical sense that they’re ending the reciprocity on December 31st, 2024.

That’s the scoop. I’m going back to my writing hiatus. I will continue to approve comments that come in.