I got down to thinking of a way to engage readers more and spotlight opinions that aren’t mine (because that was the whole point of Stenonymous and what I wanted Stenonymous to be about). Back in “the day,” I asked people to sign up as official authors and write articles. That doesn’t speak to people. That’s okay.
But it leads me to wonder what will speak to people. Perhaps we can have a sort of “letter to the editor,” type thing where people could air their disagreements, agreements, comments, information, request response, make public suggestions. Whatever you want the Stenonymous community to know/see, barring abusive language. I’ll even accept jokes about me, up to a point. It’ll be a skin-thickening exercise. People can use Stenonymous as a conduit to share information anonymously without the fear that comes from emailing me. Just make sure it’s somewhat court reporting &/or stenotype services related.
About ten days ago I launched an ad campaign to survey the public about court reporting. Question number one, had they heard about us?
Stenonymous Public Perceptions May-June 2022 Survey Question 1
When asked what terms were associated with court reporting, respondents overwhelmingly selected terms like “fast,” “technological,” and “adaptive,” over words like “old.”
Then I asked respondents if they could tell a court reporter anything, what would it be? The majority of responses were positive, with comments like “great job” or “bless you for listening to all the nonsense.” There were about six negative comments, with things like “your days are numbered.” There were a series of questions, like, “how do you like your job?” Finally, there were comments that didn’t fit into a simple “positive,” “negative,” or “question” category. These were comments like “smoke weed” or “I wish I had stayed in my stenography class.” The responses are in Google Sheets (Excel) format here. If you would like a simple PDF where the responses have already been categorized, download below.
Finally, I asked respondents for their e-mail if they wanted more information about stenography. Nearly 40 people provided their e-mail, and tomorrow morning, will receive the following message:
Message sent to Stenonymous survey takers.
For this advertisement, 20,707 people were reached with 1,668 engagements and 614 link clicks.
What can we learn from this? Well, for starters, the majority of people have heard of what we do. The majority of people do not associate the term “old” with stenography. This is an eye opener, because prior to this survey, I believed our biggest issue was overcoming the view that we are obsolete. The survey results seem to point more toward a public that largely understands this skill is not outdated. This may change how we talk about steno, no longer coming from a place of defense, but pride, and helping others understand why it is a good career.
This may also redefine the way we discuss shortage. If the perception of being “old” is not what is stopping people from getting into this field, what is it? I would submit that the problem, at least partially, goes back to pay. In these times of allegedly insurmountable shortage, I’ve learned that some companies in my hometown of New York City are paying lower than $3.50 per page. That’s simply too low to attract and retain talent, and far below the $5.74 it would be today had the rate kept up with inflation. It’s easy to say, “skill up.” But if we “skill up” a field of people that struggle with knowing their value, all we’re really doing is setting ourselves up to have the realtime rates drop through the floor. Seems to me that marketing and sales training would provide better outcomes than realtime at this point.
Please feel free to spread the results of this survey. Information leads to new ideas, and there are over 27,000 court reporter minds out there that might come up with bigger and better solutions.
