“Posted Anonymously” – What the Surge of Hidden Voices Reveals About Court Reporting’s Online Culture

Posted bystenoimperiumPosted inCourt ReportingTags:, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

In recent months, a noticeable shift has taken place across Facebook Groups dedicated to court reporters. Posts are no longer proudly authored with names and credentials. Instead, a growing number are tagged with the familiar gray label: “Posted anonymously.”

At first glance, it might seem harmless—perhaps someone asking a sensitive question or navigating a difficult situation. But scroll long enough, and a troubling pattern emerges: reporters are afraid to speak openly. They worry about backlash, gossip, being reported to their agencies, or worse—being doxxed and targeted.

The rise of anonymous posts in these groups isn’t just a behavioral shift; it’s a red flag. It signals a deeper, systemic dysfunction within the online culture of court reporting—and a growing obsolescence of the platforms we once trusted to connect and support us.

Behind the Anonymity: Fear, Not Privacy

The “post anonymously” feature on Facebook was designed as a way to encourage open dialogue about personal or vulnerable issues. But in court reporting communities, it’s become a shield against professional retaliation.

Reporters use it to:

  • Ask questions about struggling with software or realtime translation without being seen as “incompetent”
  • Vent about low pay, overwork, or agency politics
  • Express concerns about the future of the profession, AI, and outsourcing
  • Share experiences of burnout, harassment, or unethical practices

The fact that these posts are anonymous doesn’t make them less important. In fact, it makes them more urgent. What does it say about a profession when members can’t ask for help or express doubt without fearing consequences?

A Profession That Eats Its Own

Many who work in court reporting will quietly admit what some say out loud: the culture can be brutal. Gossip is rampant. Bullying goes unchecked. People take screenshots of group posts and share them in backchannels. In extreme cases, reporters have been tattled on to their agencies or clients, resulting in job loss or damaged reputations.

This behavior doesn’t just create a toxic atmosphere—it actively undermines the profession’s future. Talented new reporters, overwhelmed by the hostility, either go silent or leave. Experienced reporters stop mentoring, choosing self-protection over engagement.

An anonymous poster recently wrote, “I love the work, but I’m terrified of the people. I’ve never seen a profession where everyone is so eager to destroy each other.” And judging by the number of supportive comments (and the fact it was posted anonymously), they’re far from alone.

Facebook Isn’t Helping—It’s Part of the Problem

Once a vibrant hub for sharing knowledge and community support, Facebook Groups for court reporters are now increasingly dysfunctional. That’s not just due to the toxic culture—they’re also suffering from platform decay.

  • Posts get buried or disappear entirely
  • The search function is nearly useless
  • Engagement is low unless a post is dramatic or inflammatory
  • Group moderation is often inconsistent or absent altogether

These issues make the platform functionally obsolete for professionals who need timely, reliable, and safe spaces to learn and grow. And when you combine that with the social toxicity, it’s no wonder people are opting for anonymity—or leaving entirely.

Anonymity Is a Warning Sign

When a professional community sees a surge in anonymous interaction, it’s not a sign of strength. It’s a symptom of deep psychological unsafety.

Anonymity is supposed to encourage vulnerability—but here, it’s being used to avoid punishment. Reporters don’t trust the space. They don’t trust their peers. And many no longer trust that their honest questions or opinions won’t be weaponized against them.

This isn’t sustainable. A profession where people must hide to participate is a profession at risk.

What the Court Reporting Community Can Learn From This

There’s a choice to be made—individually and collectively. Do we continue to tolerate a culture where fear rules the conversation? Or do we take steps to rebuild a professional environment where respect, mentorship, and real support are the norm?

Here’s where we can start:

  1. Acknowledge the Problem
    We can’t fix what we refuse to name. The culture of gossip, bullying, and retaliation is real—and harmful.
  2. Call Out the Behavior
    Silence protects bullies. When toxic behavior is normalized, everyone suffers. If you have tenure or influence, use it to support those who speak up.
  3. Create Safer, Smaller Spaces
    Consider moving discussions to private, moderated platforms like Discord, Slack, or even invite-only groups with strong codes of conduct.
  4. Protect Anonymity—but Address the Cause
    Anonymity can be valuable, but it shouldn’t be the only safe option. The goal should be a culture where names aren’t a liability.

The Bigger Picture

Court reporting is already under pressure—from automation, shrinking budgets, and public misunderstanding of the profession’s value. The last thing it needs is self-inflicted damage through a hostile online culture that isolates and intimidates its own members.

The explosion of anonymous posts isn’t just a curiosity—it’s a message. People are desperate for help, for connection, for safety. The fact that they don’t feel they can get that under their own name should alarm everyone who cares about the future of this profession.

Facebook may still be the most active platform for court reporters right now. But if this trend continues—if fear continues to outweigh trust—it won’t matter how many members are in the group. The real conversation will be happening elsewhere, behind closed doors, in whispered chats, or not at all.

And if that happens, we won’t just lose a Facebook Group—we’ll lose one of the few remaining spaces where this fractured profession could still come together.

Disclaimer

The content of this post is intended for informational and discussion purposes only. All opinions expressed herein are those of the author and are based on publicly available information, industry standards, and good-faith concerns about nonprofit governance and professional ethics. No part of this article is intended to defame, accuse, or misrepresent any individual or organization. Readers are encouraged to verify facts independently and to engage constructively in dialogue about leadership, transparency, and accountability in the court reporting profession.

  • The content on this blog represents the personal opinions, observations, and commentary of the author. It is intended for editorial and journalistic purposes and is protected under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
  • Nothing here constitutes legal advice. Readers are encouraged to review the facts and form independent conclusions.

***To unsubscribe, just smash that UNSUBSCRIBE button below — yes, the one that’s universally glued to the bottom of every newsletter ever created. It’s basically the “Exit” sign of the email world. You can’t miss it. It looks like this (brace yourself for the excitement):

Published by stenoimperium

We exist to facilitate the fortifying of the Stenography profession and ensure its survival for the next hundred years! As court reporters, we've handed the relationship role with our customers, or attorneys, over to the agencies and their sales reps.  This has done a lot of damage to our industry.  It has taken away our ability to have those relationships, the ability to be humanized and valued.  We've become a replaceable commodity. Merely saying we are the “Gold Standard” tells them that we’re the best, but there are alternatives.  Who we are though, is much, much more powerful than that!  We are the Responsible Charge.  “Responsible Charge” means responsibility for the direction, control, supervision, and possession of stenographic & transcription work, as the case may be, to assure that the work product has been critically examined and evaluated for compliance with appropriate professional standards by a licensee in the profession, and by sealing and signing the documents, the professional stenographer accepts responsibility for the stenographic or transcription work, respectively, represented by the documents and that applicable stenographic and professional standards have been met.  This designation exists in other professions, such as engineering, land surveying, public water works, landscape architects, land surveyors, fire preventionists, geologists, architects, and more.  In the case of professional engineers, the engineering association adopted a Responsible Charge position statement that says, “A professional engineer is only considered to be in responsible charge of an engineering work if the professional engineer makes independent professional decisions regarding the engineering work without requiring instruction or approval from another authority and maintains control over those decisions by the professional engineer’s physical presence at the location where the engineering work is performed or by electronic communication with the individual executing the engineering work.” If we were to adopt a Responsible Charge position statement for our industry, we could start with a draft that looks something like this: "A professional court reporter, or stenographer, is only considered to be in responsible charge of court reporting work if the professional court reporter makes independent professional decisions regarding the court reporting work without requiring instruction or approval from another authority and maintains control over those decisions by the professional court reporter’s physical presence at the location where the court reporting work is performed or by electronic communication with the individual executing the court reporting work.” Shared purpose The cornerstone of a strategic narrative is a shared purpose. This shared purpose is the outcome that you and your customer are working toward together. It’s more than a value proposition of what you deliver to them. Or a mission of what you do for the world. It’s the journey that you are on with them. By having a shared purpose, the relationship shifts from consumer to co-creator. In court reporting, our mission is “to bring justice to every litigant in the U.S.”  That purpose is shared by all involved in the litigation process – judges, attorneys, everyone.  Who we are is the Responsible Charge.  How we do that is by Protecting the Record.

Leave a comment