The modern world relies heavily on advanced technology. After all, these innovations come with tons of benefits, such as efficiency and accuracy. As a result, most, if not all, industries have adapted a more digital approach, including the legal sector. Nevertheless, some individuals like Christopher Day, also known as Stenonymous, are still wary about new technologies being utilized in the field.
In the courtroom, stenographers play an essential role. According to the NCRA, they are “highly trained professionals who share a unique ability to convert the spoken word into information that can be read, searched and archived.”
However, in recent years another method of recording court proceedings has been steadily gaining traction: digital court reporting. This approach involves using high-quality multi-channel digital recording equipment to capture and annotate the audio from the deposition. At the same time, a digital court reporter must always be present to oversee the recording process.
There is no denying that both professions are essential and have their respective pros and cons. But despite that, stenography enthusiast Christopher Day has made claims that some of the biggest companies in the field prefer digital court reporting for financial gains.
He said in a blog post, “The plot is to exaggerate and exacerbate the stenographer shortage because two of the largest companies in my field, US Legal Support and Veritext, seem to believe digital court reporting will have better profit margins.”
In another one of his posts, he also alluded to stenography’s unrivaled superiority. He wrote, “It is very clear that the company wishes to exaggerate shortage claims in order to sell attorneys the inferior digital court reporting product at inflated and unreasonable prices.”
Based on these statements, one can assume that Christopher Day finds technology and innovations unappealing and unsatisfactory. This may stem from the fact that he is strongly advocating for stenographers, which is a noble cause to take on in and of itself.
But on the other hand, people should also take his comments with a grain of salt. After all, his unwavering conviction to promote the welfare of stenographers may have contributed to his prejudiced take against digital court reporting and companies who wish to utilize the service.
Even established stenographers have seen the merits of the digital approach, and many consider it to be the future of court reporting. Regardless of what Christopher Day claims, digital court reporting has proven that it has indispensable advantages and is in no way inferior compared to stenography.
On top of that, he is essentially discrediting and dismissing the remarkable advantages brought about by new technologies. These benefits are the primary reason big businesses like US Legal Support and Veritext utilize advanced tech like digital court reporting.
While stenographers provide a much-needed real-time service, digital court reporting also has an advantage when it comes to accuracy as it can capture every word uttered inside the courtroom. This shows that the services are two sides of the same coin. When both are used at the appropriate timing and situation, it promotes a better level of court reporting.
