To Our Litigators

RE: Stenographic Reporters

If you’re reading, I’m going to hope you’re the kind of lawyer that we all look up to. You’re responsive to clients, you’re honest with potential clients about what you can do for them, and you’re ready when it comes to filings, motions, discovery, or trial. Maybe you’re the one at your firm tailoring your service to your client’s budget, or maybe you oversee someone doing that for you. But the end is the same, giving the consumer the best value for the budget.

That’s what urges me to write today. There has been a lot said about “AI” transcription and digital recording versus stenographic reporting. There has been a lot said in my field about the Ducker Report and a forecasted shortage of court reporters. Some brave companies are turning to remote reporting, where legal, to allow a stenographer to appear remotely. Other courageous reporters are doubling their workload to meet your demand.

There is one solution that’s come out known as digital reporting. The main idea is that someone will record the proceedings, run it through a computer program, and then someone will fix up what the computer does. Perhaps unsurprisingly, this is what we stenographers actually do. The major difference is we are stenographically recording (typing!) every word, and the computer is accepting that stenographic word and turning it into your English transcript.

The bottom line is: It simply ends up being more efficient to do it our way. One person, perhaps two, can stenographically record and transcribe an entire proceeding and have it to you that night or the next morning. For your dollar, there’s just not better value. Stenographers type four to five times faster than your average typist, so to finish the same proceeding, we are talking about four or five times the usual turnaround time for transcribers, or four or five times the staffing. Take the number of stenographers you have today, and multiply that number by 3, 4, or 5. If you think there’s a shortage and/or workflow issues now, imagine a world where you need five court reporters to put together your one proceeding. Imagine a world where the transcript is questioned and you need to bring those people in to testify instead of one stenographer.

Trust me when I say the firms switching to digital reporting or demanding you change your deposition notices to allow digital reporters are not saving you or your clients any money. Ever notice how there are almost never prices posted online for services? That’s because most of these companies act as middlemen. They make an agreement with you or the insurer, and then they make an agreement with us, the stenographers or transcribers, and they keep what’s in the middle. It’s really that simple. I would not be surprised, as a stenographer, to learn that I only made $3.25 a page on some of my old depositions with 25 cents per copy while the agency I worked with charged whatever they charged. 5? 6? 7? I don’t know. I only know that when I consulted a lawyer, the lawyer wanted almost 15 dollars a page if my case went to depositions.

I’ve been a stenographer for a long time, and I see two roads that you, the litigators, may take. You can let the sellers decide the market, and eventually stenographers won’t be an option, or you can make a sustained demand for a stenographic reporter at every dep. When lawyers start turning to direct market apps like Appear Me, Expedite Legal, and NexDep to get stenographers, those agencies pushing the digital and AI will jump on board and do whatever it takes to increase your supply of stenographers and get your business back.

Stenographers have been serving the legal community for decades. There’s been a push in recent years to do away with us because of a public perception that our methods are antiquated. Ironically, the people leading this charge are the companies we trusted with selling our services. So to our litigators: You now know all I know, and the customer is always right. Which will you choose?

The Audio Sink

We’ll try not to pontificate too much beyond the title, but it’s time to jump right into discussion on Audio Sync technology. For a quick overview to newbies, the aptly acronym’d AS is basically an audio recording contemporaneously taken with your stenographic notes that allows you to jump to that place in the audio where your notes were taken.

It’s a wonderful tool that’s revered by newbies and seasoned reporters alike. It’s a great thing. It was impressive when it came out and remains an impressive feat of technology today. All that acknowledged, it’s time to put out some caution for the newbie or seasoned writer that utilizes it. Many will have seen these ideas or perhaps assume everyone already knows these things. We’ll assume the weakest link doesn’t and strengthen the chain.

First thing is first, if you’re going to use it, it’s not good to rely on it. Computers are funny. Sometimes they appear to be recording but aren’t. Sometimes they’re recording so much background noise it makes the audio useless. Sometimes you, the operator, forget to turn on the mic. It can be beneficial to pretend you do not have it. As saying goes, if you didn’t hear that answer, don’t assume the microphone did.

It can be beneficial to take jobs without it for three reasons. Firstly, it gives you an accurate idea of where you’re at. If you need a repeat every few seconds it feels awful, but it gives you an honest understanding that when you find some time, you need to work on that speed, or work on that particular accent, or improve whatever is going wrong within your control. There are resourceful tricks we often only come up with if we are forced to get it and do not allow ourselves to “let the audio catch it.”

Then there is also a boon to your wallet. If you rely on audio, then you listen to the entire deposition over, and it can literally double or triple your transcription time to listen to something more than once. Time is money, and very few of us have time to spend listening to every job over. Learning to read misstrokes and getting to glide from word to word will save you time and money in the long run. In the short run, you can also listen to music while transcribing.

If you’re planning on taking an employment test, the ability to walk into a job without audio is priceless. Your transcription skills and on-the-spot resourcefulness will be as sharp as it gets. You will have the ability to cope with getting it under pressure.

In the view of many, AS has done wonders for the field, but also hurt us badly. We graduate at 95 percent accuracy. Many of us go on to let the audio catch it, resulting in lower accuracy, longer transcription times, and tougher times passing examinations for certification or employment. This isn’t to ostracize those among us that use it or even rely on it, but to encourage that occasional job where you shut it off and let yourself develop skills in polite interruption and writing resourcefulness that this generation of reporter just hasn’t had to develop.

Veritext Update, March 2019

Introduction & History.

First and foremost: This post is going to get into past history and then go into more recent history. In the more recent history, in order to prove that what we’re saying is true, there are screen shots of a person’s LinkedIn social media. We’re free to discuss that and we’re free to say how we feel, but any reader that comes here should be aware that harassment, bullying, menacing, stalking, and defamation are all amoral and illegal. Those things may all open you up to criminal and civil action. If you use our steno news as a gateway for antisocial behavior, do not be surprised if you get police at your door.

Now onto history. Veritext was a leader in working to bolster stenography. A quick Google search will show you that assuming all the media out there to be true or partially true, they are a partner to NCRA and do or did, on some level, and sometimes on an astounding level, support the stenographic methodology for taking the record. It is hard to tell if what follows is a case of Yes, Prime Minister’s advice on backstabbing or a case of the principle of hedging. Veritext proceeded to buy out a lot of stenographic or court reporting companies, including Diamond Reporting here in New York. Next, we caught wind that Veritext was advertising to attorneys that they should change their deposition notices to add language of “stenographic or other means”, presumably so that Veritext could choose to send digital reporters to jobs.

This all ended up culminating in a post where we mirrored SoCalReporter’s ideas and said: We need to stop beating each other up about where we work and start talking solutions. Guess what happened? People started coming up with solutions, and content, and even going so far as to create watchdog groups. We have said this before, but we are seeing a memetic shift. The reporting zeitgeist of silence is over. There are hundreds of voices blogging, talking, and working together to come up with new ideas.

Today & Tomorrow.

So that brings us to the end of February 2019. A woman named Gina Hardin, purportedly a VP of Sales at Veritext, wrote or posted an article about digital reporting being the changing landscape of reporting. There was a great deal of chatter about this, culminating in the post being taken down the night it was posted, and an immediate declaration from Veritext that the post was posted by a former employee and that they had nothing to do with it, honest. This doesn’t pass the colloquial “sniff test” or SMELL test for being true. Why would a former employee try to drum up business for a past employer? In this country, with so few rights for workers, what employee would ever go out on a limb and post something like that without their employer’s explicit permission? Unless you work for the government or have a contract saying otherwise, you can be fired for any reason or no reason, even a made up reason, just not an illegal reason, of which there are very few. The whole thing just doesn’t make sense. And if she’s a former employee, apparently nobody told her, because as of March 2, 2019, she was still listed as working at Veritext, but under the name Gina H. It’s all but undeniable that Veritext is pushing digital, including hiring via their website.

Now, here’s the deal: Some people went online and talked about the typos in the article, or even had personal attacks. It’s not about her. As best we can tell, she’s an employee doing a job, and probably doing it damn well. We make a thousand typos a day unless we’re Super Stenographer. Stenographers, and the entrepreneurs among us, should really be looking at teaming up with salespeople like that who’re dedicated to their job and willing to put themselves out there. Though we have not yet gotten a chance to interview Eve Barrett of Expedite Legal, one of the things she’s alluded to online is there’s an amazing power in human-to-human marketing because of this digital, faceless world. Who is going to be better at human-to-human marketing than someone who is willing to attach their face to the product and pitch? We wouldn’t be surprised if there are stenographic companies looking to poach Gina H. or salespeople like her right now! There’s huge money in this field. Nearly every big agency has a satellite office in every borough of New York City and a cadre of dedicated employees — in other words, there is money to be made in this field, and we shouldn’t be afraid to hire talent when it means a bigger return. Success is often a matter of intelligent delegation. As stenographers, we often let our penchant for perfectionism stand in the way of hiring help and building our brand, perhaps to a fault.

But where does that leave us? Well, we need to recognize that Veritext is apparently willing to lie. Freelancers need to recognize that group boycotts by competitors may fall under antitrust violations. Reporters everywhere need to start acknowledging that the best way to beat ’em might be to just start grabbing clients. It’s time for us to get serious about funding our associations and demanding marketing and entrepreneurial courses. These companies all exist because they got clients off of somebody else. Individually, they may seem bigger or stronger than us because they can outspend us one-on-one, but there’s an inherent power in the fact that if thousands of reporters were to compete directly with them and start poaching clients — which is perfectly legal unless you signed a contract saying you wouldn’t do that or stole a trade secret — they’d be SOL.

For the most ambitious, start looking at fundraising. Start considering all the ways companies come into existence. You very well could be the next nationwide conglomerate. As a matter of fact, if you’re in Illinois, New York, California, or Texas, you are in one of the largest court reporting states in the country, and you have a real shot at seizing the market. Companies rise and fall — but your career is in your hands.

We look forward to the day Veritext sees it’s on the losing side and starts throwing its weight behind stenography again. We look forward to dutifully reporting that right here on this blog. But until that day comes, we encourage fierce competition in this market. Don’t be complacent. Maybe someday we’ll get SLAPP’d for standing up for our profession, but we’re happy to take the heat so that you don’t have to. Be involved. Encourage others to get involved and start building their brand. Know that you are making a difference in how the market and our day-to-day jobs develop.

Of Strategy and Commitment

Before you read another word, if you want to cut to the chase and help: Go to the nearest public forum where court reporting or stenography is a topic and write something positive about steno. The rest of the post is a broader look at one thing I’m working on right now.Some will inevitably see my message to e court reporters and transcribers. As a matter of fact some have seen it, and I have responded. To be honest, it all goes back to a post I wrote about the limits of institution. To really sum it up, I wrote a friendly post to e court reporters and transcribers. It says, more or less:

Try steno.
If you won’t do that, ask for more money. The work you’re doing is valuable.
Unionize.

The natural reaction to this by the typical stenographer is: But Chris, are you not outraged? Shouldn’t you be telling everyone that the main CR companies are pushing ECRs? And of course, the truth is, I am. I am outraged. You could fill a thousand stars with my outrage. But it isn’t outrage that will save us. I had the good fortune to read about the Pygmalion Effect recently and the power of words in print. The general idea is that expectations can actually affect reality, and that when people read words they are more likely to believe them and follow them.

So the strategy is simple. Take everything that makes digital reporting profitable and absolutely destroy it. Tell these people that they’re being used, tell them that they are being given less, tell them they can make more and be more productive as stenographers. It’s true! It’s the truth! It sets an expectation higher for them so that they aim for the stars and not the ground. Put steno in the best possible light with the best public face.

The next part of the strategy: Compete with these agencies. They might seem individually bigger and tougher than us because they have investors who have put down a lot of money, but if there’s one thing history tells us it’s that big companies with national presence can go broke the same as anyone else. If stenographers compete with them, we will beat them. In about a week there’ll be a post about one company that is doing its part to push us out. If you’re not in a position to start grabbing clients, that’s okay, but contribute to the environment that freelancers can do this. Write an article about how you’d do it. Platform yourself and spread a message of how people can be successful. Maybe write stenonymously.

I will do my part to bring articles and ideas relevant to business and building business. I need to rely on my court reporting friends to spread the message, and I need to rely on freelancers to take the message to heart and execute it better than I ever could, but in the end, we as a group will come out on top, and that’s what matters to me.

One thing is clear though: Relying on someone else to fix all our problems is not safe. Everyone has their own interest, and so it is imperative to fight for our own interest. NCRA and state associations will catch on and follow our lead as we develop strategies and resources for taking back our market share. Consider it this way: There are at least 15,000 stenos across the country. If each of us contributed five seconds to something for the field, that’s a day’s worth of work done.

The Positive Reporting Challenge

Have you been on the stenography or court reporting subreddits? You may be surprised to see that those communities are not heavily populated by stenographers, but awash with electronic recording heralds.

It’s no secret what they’re doing. They’re poaching people who have an interest in stenography or court reporting and siphoning them to recording. It’s out there in the open, it’s legal and allowed. Transcribers can be taken from a pool of people that know nothing about what we do or how much we make, and then put to work for far less than what they deserve for the job — our job.

They rely on us being complacent and putting on a vitriolic, belligerent public face. They rely on us not taking notice or doing nothing about it. They rely on us not stepping in and saying: Yeah, you can go record, but you can also do what I do, and wow, what I do has given me a lot of success. They need people to become transcribers. The companies that want transcribers are on a recruitment drive, and they go directly to the root to get recruits, us.

I say we take it back. One person described how their girlfriend just got a job recording for US Legal. You know what I did? I said wow, congratulations. But if she likes it, why doesn’t she try steno? She can get paid more for the same job! Encourage people. Empower people to step up the game and join the stenographic legion. And boy, did it enflame another user. He was all LOL tape recorders are taking your job.

And now I realize — this strikes a nerve. It absolutely breaks their game when we come in and say: Hey, this is a great career, and you make more. I mean just by politely suggesting steno, I made someone explode.

So what do I propose? I propose anyone who has five minutes this month sit down, make a Reddit account, head over there to the stenography or court reporting subreddit, and post something positive about steno, or post a resource for steno. Whether you had a great run for 30 years, or you mentored a student, or you have a wonderful resource for sten learners, or you have a great career right now, just go write about it. Let’s be honest, there are thousands of us. If just ten say something nice about steno, it drowns out the ads for ER and puts us in the best possible light.

What’s business about? Presence. Location, location, location. And right now you’ve got ER sitting right under a sign labeled court reporting. Set up shop and put it out there for the public: This field’s here to stay.

Veritext Buys A Diamond

In a perhaps not-so-surprising move Veritext bought Diamond. I wish every reporter a great deal of luck and success, but I do want to talk a little bit about why I think this is overall bad for us.

Corporations are entities made to create a profit for their owners. That’s their legal and primary purpose. There’s nothing really wrong with this, it’s kind of how things work. When you buy a stock in a public corporation, generally you can rest assured that the Board of Directors has a duty to protect the value of your shares. Yay.

But this poses a unique problem for reporters. Their duty is to their bottom line. What’s one of the biggest expenses? Labor. What’s labor in reporting? Our fees! So ultimately, Veritext, which I now nickname Gobbler Corporation, has bought its way into having what I imagine to be a pretty hefty book of business. This is bad for the following reasons:

If the reporter shortage continues, they have an incentive to push audio recording. It is cheaper and it will always be cheaper to get someone to take notes during a proceeding while it’s being recorded than hiring a stenographic reporter. This savings isn’t likely to be transferred to the lawyers and litigants, but added to Veritext’s bottom line.

If the shortage does not continue, Veritext has a larger market share of New York and will have a better ability to dictate prices to its reporters.

Honest solutions? We need to be better on our information game. We need to keep instructing reporters on what we are worth and encourage them to be powerful entrepreneurs. I’ve written before in this blog about how people can negotiate or seek information on government contracts. Perhaps soon I can write about becoming an NYC Vendor. Now is the time! More than that: We need to start fighting harder. As they start shifting to recorders, resist. Call up your favorite law firm and offer your services. Become the competition. Make them buy you out too. Reach out to law firms and tell them, hey, they’re cutting us out, and they’re not passing those savings to you, so hire a stenographic reporter today for a better deal!

This is the best damn time to be a reporter that I’ve seen in New York. The court system wants you. The unions want you. The association wants you. The agencies want you. Your skills are in real demand. But your willingness to step out of your comfort zone and really connect with customers, clients, lawyers, and the end users of our services really can alter how everything plays out. What you do actually makes a difference. Why? Strategy. Envision the whole thing as a game of chess. In Chess, if you refuse to move, you concede the game. Most of us are not wealthy, can’t concede and stop working. If you let the other player take all your pieces off the board, the sources you rely on for work, pulling off a win grows ever more challenging. If you start making moves, you force the opponent to react. Their game gets thrown because they can’t account for every move you make. Every dollar an entity gets is a dollar that makes them stronger. What do you think happens if the hundreds of stenographers in the city start taking dollars away by being real competition?

And we’re bothering people that want stenography to fail big time. The fact that we’re catching on and creating a plan to fight back is hurting them so bad that they’re gloating at me in anonymous e-mails about how our days are numbered.

So the choice is simple. Concede and let the current shotcallers decide how things are going to go, or step it up and take the time to read about how to draft responses to city RFPs (requests for proposals) and become true entrepreneurs, and introduce true competition to a needy, living market. Remember that a market is not just “oh, they want to pay me this”, but an amalgam of buyers and sellers, all seeking the best deal for themselves. Remember that as a provider you are the backbone of the market, and it’s your action or inaction that dictates tomorrow.

Veritext bought a Diamond. There’s no reason we can’t build ten more.

The Good Reporter Fallacy

I’ll just come out and say it. There are folks among us that think speech recognition technology is going to beat court reporters. I’ll even go so far as to say I personally believe that the technology will eventually do what we do.

But first on the issue of technology: Read what they aren’t saying. The technology is 95 percent accurate! But what was the setting under which it was accurate? Was there an air conditioner blowing overhead? Was someone printing directly behind the recording machine? Were there people speaking over each other? Did the computer accurately designate who spoke? Was the computer able to handle an unidentified speaker? Were there multiple speakers at different distances? Did the test take place in rooms of various sizes and acoustics? Yes, it is my sincere and honest belief that someday technology will be there to seamlessly do all of this, but there is no telling when. Until it is there, it is smoke. They’re blowing smoke just like everyone else who wants to sell a product. When it is there, we still fight to keep the jobs we have.

And that’s the topic of today’s missive. So some believe we’ll be overtaken by technology, and they are saying: Do not invite people into this dying field. That makes sense if you take the fact that it is dying as true and completely irreversible. Our current crisis in the reporting world is a reporter shortage, and their answer is: Don’t do anything and ride this career to the bitter end. There will be jobs for the good reporters.

But what is that good reporter? A realtimer? There are more non-realtime jobs than realtime jobs. Even today, there are more non-realtime jobs. So even if everyone is a good reporter tomorrow, there aren’t enough jobs for you if we give up that non-realtime work. Sorry. It’s a delicate balance. Reporter shortage means it’s easier for customers to swap to recording because there simply aren’t enough of us to meet a demand. Reporter glut means we suffer because high supply generally means lower cost (wage).

Well, right now, at this second, we are facing a shortage, and in the great wide world of life, we have better chances if there are more of us. Consider NCRA’s old strength of what I’m told was 30,000 reporters versus today’s — whatever — 15,000. That was literally double the budget to fight for reporters. Double the constituents when politicians ask how many people they are representing. Double pretty much everything.

So you can get up and introduce this field to somebody and be a part of ending the shortage, or you can sit it out and see what happens, and we can be friends either way, but I think it’s best to act. It’s very simple statistically: Can’t win if you don’t try. People play lotto on that same principle, so isn’t a shot at saving thousands of careers worth trying too? Look at politics. When your preferred politician or proposed legislation fails, do you just drop everything and say “I support this because it’s happening.” Maybe, but according to my Facebook, not likely!

If you’re an average person, you matter. History was built on average people. Armies are built out of average people. Battles were won when average people got the enemy army to route. The computer technology we use started with overall average programmers using punch cards to give computers simple instructions!

If you’re above average, show us. We average people want great leaders. We want problem solvers and talented people to look up to. There’s a market for greatness and a world of ways to uplift people. What if someone could design a steno program that got someone out in months, not years? What if someone could design a political campaign capable of sustaining our jobs even when the technology does what we do?

Be a creator. Be an inventor. Be an innovator. Support the people fighting for you. Support the people around you. Support yourself. Do what people say can’t be done. Be a winner. And remember, besides thermonuclear war, there are few times you can win by not playing.

The Limitations of Institution

If only a reader could experience that same sour feeling I have having to write this. Recently, I spotted a non-steno recording job on one of the court reporting groups. We have a deep disdain for that stuff because digital recording is making its way into pretty much any market it can and our strongest potential defenders, the big box agencies, can be pretty much fine with whatever happens because they can switch direction or become a recording firm. They’re only going to spend money on reporting for as long as they’re making money on reporting. We, as individuals, couldn’t make so easy a switch. The jobs would, in all likelihood, pay a lot less and force a lot of us out. We don’t have anybody fighting for us. We don’t have, individually, a great deal of money. And, for some reason, we refuse to support state and national organizations that could, given a better budget and a more robust membership, fight for us. So before I jump into the limitations of institution, let me just say, join one today! There’s a heck of a lot of power in a collective, and it is one avenue we must not ignore in bringing more people into the field.

But now it’s time to talk about the restrictions imposed on institutions. They can’t discuss prices for fear of being branded as price fixers and slapped with antitrust litigation. They can’t, on a whim, make posts or statements. Everything is controlled by a board, or bylaw, or some legal standard. In the end, this is good, because it ensures that members that join a reporting association can pretty much join and be comfortable that the board is going to do the right thing, or everyone will be able to see detrimental changes to the organization from a mile away and be allowed to yell, “stop! Stop!” In the end, this is also bad, because it makes some tactics or solutions unimaginable or unimaginably slow for an institution.

That’s where we, mostly free people, can come into play. I’ve been quite troubled in recent times. We have a great presence of reporters on Facebook. There are innumerable groups meant to support reporters and we’re doing fine there. But the internet is large, and we are losing ground in a lot of places. On Reddit and Quora the digital reporting folks and the resurgence of stenography in India have started to block us out. YouTube’s got a lot of Indian steno too. If you’re searching court reporting, you’re getting recorders. If you’re searching stenography, you’re getting at least some Indian content.

So the other day I saw a job for exactly one position for a digital recorder on Staten, and I posted it on Facebook on my own page and in a very large NYC jobs page with over 150,000 members. But I did that with an objective. Along with this one position, I made sure the words court reporting, stenography, and machine shorthand reporter hit that page. I made sure to say if you like legal proceedings, come do what I do, there are jobs open for real court reporters today. I accept that I’ll be told I’m wrong. I accept that I’ll be talked about behind my back. But I brought the words machine shorthand reporter in front of a potential 150,000 jobseekers in one post. Jobseekers with friends, and family, and all sorts of people who know people. Frankly, why do you think digital reporters are sitting on our Reddit? To draw people and say come, do what we do. I say to any of you, they have these recording jobs already, and they’re going to fill them, so it’s probably time for we who are not limited by institution to fight exactly the way they fight. Be where they are. Grab the attention of people they’re marketing to. Yeah, you can do that, but you can also become a machine shorthand reporter and do better! You can do better! You can be one of us! And as for why I didn’t just mention straight court reporting? The gates of that group of 150,000 jobseekers are high. They have strict rules about what can be posted and how it can be posted. I had to fit their mold, and I used the recorders to do it.

If you want reporting to be a viable option for a child, friend, or family member, it has to stay robust and attract students. We all know how hard it is to make it through school. A small percentage of people that see court reporting will try it. A small percentage of the people that try it will like it. A small percentage of the people that like it will be good at it. And finally, a percentage of the people who are good at it will make a career of it. If we don’t get a whole heck of a lot of people to see court reporting, we’re looking at a situation where we’re replaced with recorders out of necessity.

So if you see me out there doing something you don’t like, feel free to ask, feel free to denigrate, feel free to do whatever it is you do, but remember that most of that energy can be used to come up with bigger and better ideas than I ever had. Remember that this field needs you.

Audio Transcription, Pricing, And You

First and foremost, happy Thanksgiving. As with most great writers, I’m going to take the time away from preparing to the holiday to write about something I know everybody will want to read about: Audio transcription and pricing. As stenographers, we tend to get very focused on a per-page pricing structure. This often leaves us trying to measure our time by pages, and is not always the most ineffective way of being paid.

For purposes of this post, let’s talk a little about CART, audio transcription, and pricing generally. CART and audio transcription are not the same thing, but they have similarities. One key similarity is that they tend to charge by the hour. For CART it’s per hour of writing, usually with a set minimum, and for audio transcription it’s money per hour of audio, sometimes prorated for audio that doesn’t last a whole hour or end exactly on an hour.

Succinctly, for CART, captioning, and audio transcription, despite having different prerequisite skills, the pricing for all of them must take into account the amount of work we’re doing, the quality of the work we’re doing, and ultimately the time it will take us to do the work. So speaking strictly for transcription: I’ve guesstimated that it takes me approximately one to two hours for every hour on the machine to transcribe with pretty close to 100% accuracy. That means for every hour of audio, there are about three hours of actual work involved. So, for me, honestly, working for less than $30/hr becomes painful, so the transcription deal isn’t sweet until maybe the $100-something range. The bottom line of this story? We must examine our time and really decide what it’s worth.

In examining our time, we can also consider other factors. For example, what are other people charging for the same work? As we can see from this Google search here, there are companies that boast a $1/minute transcription fee. So if we do an independent assessment of our time, and we come to the conclusion our time is worth $2/minute, that’s perfect, but just bear in mind that we may lose a couple of customers to the person who is half our price. A potential solution? Split the difference and charge $1.50 per minute.

There’s a lot that goes into economics, buying, selling, demand, supply, and no one blog post could ever impart all of that knowledge on anyone. Even top economists who have devoted their lives to understanding value and money disagree with each other. The best we can do is urge every reporter, where applicable, to look at what they charge, whether charging an agency, lawyer, or outside consumer, and consider how our pricing practices affect all different areas of the field. There’s tons of literature and articles on price matching and how it can help consumers, hurt consumers, help businesses, and hurt businesses, and the cold truth is that it’s up to us to take the time out and learn about these things, because many of us are our own business, and our business rises or falls on our willingness to learn beyond the machine.