Saving the Profession Isn’t a Runway Walk, It’s a Battlefield

Saving stenography isn’t a runway walk—it’s a battlefield. Agencies have leveraged legislation to gain ground, and courts now put their names on forms once reserved for reporters. Power circles inside our own profession deflect responsibility, as seen in the Notary Loophole fallout. The truth is simple: reporters must reclaim leadership, defend independence, and fight for the integrity of the record.

AI Transcripts vs. Human Court Reporters & Why the Record Still Needs a Person

Stanford’s data shows ASR makes twice as many errors with Black speakers as white speakers. The NCRA warns of bias, misattribution, and chain-of-custody failures. In trial after trial, I’ve seen judges and attorneys turn back to the human transcript when accuracy matters. Until a machine can raise its right hand and swear to accuracy, the record still belongs to court reporters.

The Stars That Sing – Hearing the Truth in Court Reporting

The Bushmen pitied Laurens van der Post when he admitted he could not hear the stars sing. Today, I feel the same grief for our profession. The truth rings out—schools reporting poaching, leaders failing in accountability—yet so many refuse to hear it. Our poverty is not material, but in losing the ability to hear the song of truth itself.

When Recruitment Crosses the Line – Court Reporting Schools Push Back After DRA Event

California court reporting schools are pushing back after the last DRA conference, where a speaker allegedly recruited students directly out of their programs—even inside private Teams accounts. One 200-wpm student on the verge of the CSR was lost. School leaders say enough is enough: associations must protect students from solicitation if they want them in the room.

How Zoom Depositions, Consent Laws, and Competing Recordings Are a Growing Dilemma for Court Reporters

In the age of Zoom depositions, competing recordings raise more than technical concerns — they strike at the integrity of the record. When attorneys attempt to capture their own audio, they risk violating consent laws, breaching confidentiality, and undermining the court reporter’s role. Protecting the official record sometimes means halting proceedings, even when it costs time and money.

Technology and Workplace Efficiency – The Court Reporter’s Competitive Edge

Court reporters ranked technology and workplace efficiency as their #1 priority in the latest NCRA poll (37.2%). From realtime integration to secure tools like Eclipse Boost, technology is not a threat but an amplifier—when it’s reporter-controlled. Efficiency means more accuracy, faster turnaround, less stress, and stronger client loyalty. The future of steno is in our hands.

Why Judges Cannot Rely on AI Captions – The Legal and Ethical Imperative of Certified Realtime

Judges may think AI captions save money, but the law is clear: only a certified court reporter can create the official record. ASR is error-prone, insecure, and unauthorized — and I’ve personally seen judges forced into readback when captions got it wrong. Bridge with Boost offers the lawful, accurate, profession-saving alternative that protects evidentiary integrity, judicial ethics, and access to justice.

The Language of CCP 2093(a) & Why Notaries Are Not Deposition Officers

California Code of Civil Procedure § 2093(a) names notaries and deposition officers as able to administer oaths—but only certified shorthand reporters are authorized to take testimony and certify transcripts. The “notary loophole” misleads attorneys into believing oaths alone make a deposition valid. Without a CSR, the record collapses. Learn why due process demands stenographers—not shortcuts.

Who’s Really Swearing in Your Witness?

Attorneys can stipulate to many things, but not to override law. Only a judge can validate agreements that alter statutory or constitutional requirements. The 5th and 14th Amendments guarantee due process: no person can be deprived of rights without it. When a deposition officer asks parties to “stipulate” to a remote oath, that shortcut risks invalidating the entire proceeding.

Fair Compensation in the Age of Derivative Products – Why Reporters Must Create a New Rate Sheet

Agencies are profiting from condensed transcripts, indexes, concordances, and now AI summaries—often billing attorneys transcript-level rates while paying reporters nothing. This is unjust enrichment. Reporters must reclaim fairness by publishing new rate sheets that define compensation for every derivative product. From condensed pages to AI outputs, the message is clear: if it’s built on the transcript, reporters deserve their share.

AI Summaries, CCR 2474, and the Fight Over Who Owns the Record

AI deposition summaries aren’t innovation—they’re exploitation. Agencies are monetizing transcripts into derivative products without consent or compensation, creating unjust enrichment while undermining the integrity of the record. California’s CCR 2474 wasn’t written with AI in mind, but the principle remains: reporters must not be in the business of interpretation. It’s time for contracts, regulation, and reform to safeguard neutrality, fairness, and trust in the transcript.

Who Owns the Transcript?

AI-generated deposition summaries may look like efficiency, but they’re really exploitation. Agencies are repackaging reporters’ transcripts into derivative products—condensed transcripts, indexes, concordances, now AI summaries—without consent or compensation. This is unjust enrichment. Reporters must protect their work with contracts, while the Court Reporters Board closes loopholes in CCR 2474. The official record is sacred, and AI summaries threaten its integrity.

Parasites with Power – How Toxic Management is Destroying Court Reporting in Superior Courts

Toxic bosses in superior courts aren’t leaders—they’re parasites with power. Court reporters are bullied, gaslit, and punished for human missteps while corruption thrives. Instead of compassion or rehabilitation, reporters are discarded, treated worse than criminals for delays often born of impossible workloads or unforeseen crises. Real reform means accountability, support, and a path back—not destruction of careers that sustain justice.

Busting the Digital “Mythbusters” – Why AI and Recorders Can’t Replace Stenographers

Digital advocates claim transcripts generated from recordings and AI are just as accurate as stenography. But predictive algorithms don’t capture testimony verbatim—they guess. That’s hearsay, not a legal record. Unlike stenographers, digital systems outsource editing, compromise confidentiality, and fail the chain of custody. Justice demands certainty, not predictions. Only stenographers deliver a verbatim, admissible record you can trust in court.

The Moment the Notary Loophole Was Unleashed in a Firestorm

On July 21, 2018, CalDRA President Cheryl Haab led a pivotal town hall in Huntington Beach where Kimberly D’Urso pressed the issue of reporter-free depositions and Ed Howard advanced a flawed interpretation of California law. This “notary loophole” allowed videographers with notary commissions to bypass court reporters—fracturing the chain of oath, taking, and certification, and putting the admissibility of testimony at risk.

Weekly Pay vs. 30-Day Law – What California Reporters Need to Know About Lexitas’s New Policy

California law now requires agencies to pay reporters within 30 days of completing services—no exceptions for invoices, transcripts, or copy orders. Lexitas’s new weekly pay schedule sounds reporter-friendly, but compliance hinges on separating per diems, transcript deadlines, and copy orders. “Pay when paid” is no longer legal. Reporters must stay vigilant and hold agencies accountable.

Major Impacts on Court Reporting if U.S. Adopts a “Voice & Likeness Property Law”

If the U.S. adopts a Denmark-style “Voice & Likeness Property Law,” digital reporting and ASR systems could face insurmountable hurdles. Every participant’s consent — and even royalties — would be required for recordings, making stenographers the clear, risk-free choice. In a world grappling with deepfakes, our ability to capture the record without recording voices positions stenographers as the most reliable safeguard of truth.

Who Really Has the Authority to Swear in Witnesses? The Notary vs. Court Reporter Divide

Who really has the authority to swear in witnesses—court reporters or notaries? It’s not a technicality. The power to administer an oath is what gives testimony its binding force. Court reporters, as officers of the court, carry statutory authority. Notaries don’t. Digital reporters straddle the line, often skipping safeguards entirely. The result? A dangerous fault line threatening the integrity of legal proceedings.

Why Congress Must Hold Hearings on the Integrity of Court Reporting in the Age of Digital Recording and AI

Congress must investigate: Who protects the record when justice is on the line? The integrity of the legal record is at risk. Attorneys report defective transcripts, hidden digital recorders, and AI posing as stenographers. This isn’t just an industry dispute — it threatens due process nationwide. Congress must act. A hearing is urgently needed to expose these practices, enforce responsible charge, and protect the record. Our democracy depends on accurate transcripts.

Digital Reporting, AI, and the Future of Court Reporting – Allegations, Lawsuits, and Industry Implications

Veritext’s reliance on digital recording and AI transcripts is finally facing attorney pushback—and possible lawsuits. For years, I’ve warned that agencies exploit loopholes like “agency certificates” to bypass stenographers. Without a responsible charge statement, the legal record is at risk of fraud and failure. It’s time for attorneys and reporters alike to demand accountability and protect the integrity of the record.

What If the United States Made Your Voice and Likeness Your Property?

What if your voice became your legal property? Denmark’s proposed law could make every voice and likeness owned — with takedowns and royalties for unauthorized use. If the U.S. follows, ASR and digital reporting face huge risks, while stenographers become the gold standard for secure, human-verified transcripts. In a world of deepfakes, stenography is justice’s strongest safeguard.

Why AI “Prediction” Can Never Replace Verbatim Court Reporting

CAT software doesn’t replace court reporters—it’s a tool they control to produce a verbatim, certified record. Digital/AI systems are different: they predict what might have been said, dropping words, mishearing accents, and collapsing overlapping speech. In court, guesses aren’t good enough. Justice requires certainty, and certainty requires stenographers—not algorithms.

Beyond the Hype – Redefining Court Reporting in the Age of AI

Artificial intelligence is changing the conversation in court reporting—but it’s not a substitute for human judgment, ethics, and accountability. The real risk lies in misleading narratives and policy shifts that treat automation as “good enough.” By uniting as professionals and adopting AI on our terms, we can protect the record, strengthen our work, and ensure justice remains built on accuracy.

Why Digital Recording Endangers Justice in Texas

The Texas Supreme Court is weighing whether to treat digital recording as equal to stenography. But digital transcripts—outsourced, uncertified, and based on hearsay—threaten accuracy, security, and due process. Claims of a “stenographer shortage” are exaggerated; online programs are thriving, with waitlists in California. Protecting litigants means protecting verbatim reporting—not lowering standards for convenience.

The Knox County Privacy Breach – A Wake-Up Call on Confidentiality and Professional Duty

A hidden microphone at the Knox County courthouse exposed private meetings and cost three officials their careers. Beyond Nebraska, the message is clear: confidentiality is the backbone of justice. Court reporters, attorneys, and judges alike must protect the record, audit technology, and guard against shifting liability. Trust, once lost, is nearly impossible to restore.

Why Transcribing from Electronic Recordings Is Hearsay — and the Stenographic Profession’s Strongest Defense

AI and electronic recordings can’t replace stenographic reporters. Why? Because transcripts created by someone not present are hearsay — and hearsay is inadmissible. Only a sworn reporter assumes Responsible Charge of the record, accountable under law. AI can’t be punished, fined, jailed, or defend its transcript in court. Without accountability, it’s just unverifiable hearsay.

Hearsay on the Record – When Transcripts Lose Their Voice

“I know you think you understand the words I said, but what you understand is not what I meant.” That statement could be made in any courtroom in America. It captures the perennial problem of miscommunication. Words are slippery things—spoken in haste, accented by dialect, altered by noise, or even obscured by emotion. Now imagineContinue reading “Hearsay on the Record – When Transcripts Lose Their Voice”

In Defense of the Crow – Why the Underdog Wins the Fight Against the Eagle

We’ve all heard the story: “The crow pecks at the eagle. The eagle doesn’t fight back. It just soars higher until the crow suffocates and falls away. Lesson? Ignore your critics. Rise above. Don’t engage.” It’s an inspiring little fable—if you’re the eagle. But what if the eagle is not a symbol of wisdom andContinue reading “In Defense of the Crow – Why the Underdog Wins the Fight Against the Eagle”

When Robots Win Trophies – What It Means for the Future of Stenography

A robot holding a trophy may symbolize progress, but in the courtroom, it represents a dangerous shortcut. While AI may offer speed, only a human stenographer ensures accuracy, accountability, and justice. When automation wins the spotlight, due process can lose. Let’s not trade trust for tech.

Who’s Reading the Jurors’ Notes? A Confidentiality Breach Hiding in Plain Sight

After a jury trial concluded, I witnessed a courtroom assistant reading through jurors’ notebooks for entertainment—laughing, speculating, and sharing contents with the clerk. Juror notes are confidential and must be destroyed, not treated like gossip fodder. This isn’t just unprofessional—it’s a breach of trust that undermines the integrity of our justice system.