When I started my court reporting career 27 years ago, to say I got asked “Do people still DO that job?” a lot would be a massive understatement.
In fact, if I had a dollar for every time I got asked that question, I’d have…..well…..let’s just say a lot of dollars.
Even while in reporting school, our class needed constant reassurance that yes, we were heading towards the right career, and yes, we were going to be employable.
I mean, even at that time in the late ‘90s Bill Gates said that jobs like mine were safe and that he wasn’t concerned about dictation software taking over “in his lifetime”.
If Bill Gates says that, I’m going to drink that Kool-Aid, because last time I checked the general consensus was this guy is pretty smart.
Now, of course, times change. We have all, at one time or another, been told not to be afraid of change.
Change is great, they say!
Embrace change, they also say! Change is healthy, they say as well! Whoever “they” are, have a very confident attitude towards change, but I honestly feel that “they” don’t necessarily represent the majority of people.
Change is good and good for us, but change is also hard and stressful, and whether abrupt or long and drawn out, it can cause anxiety and mental strain, even when the end result is a positive one.
The question I get asked the most these days, whether it be from well-meaning family and friends or lawyers and clientele of my court reporting firm, is if I am scared that AI is going to change my profession and make court reporters obsolete. It’s a good question and a timely and relevant question, and I love to be asked about this topic because I am armed with many examples of why I’m not staying up nights worried about some “robot” doing my job.
First off, I have a way better personality than a robot.
This is not tooting my own horn here, but just the facts.
I love interacting with our clients, whether they are long-time users of our firm, or brand new, still-wet-behind-the-ears lawyers who have really not come into contact with a court reporter before.
A court reporter’s job may be to sit there quietly during legal proceedings and hang on every word that is said, but all bets are off during the breaks and before and after the proceedings, and the social aspect of an otherwise litigious day has always been something that I look forward to when I get up in the morning.
All lawyer jokes aside, they are nice, and even funny! Yes, I speak the truth! Let me know when robots can keep up with human banter and provide appropriate sarcastic responses. I’ll wait…..
Secondly, I bet you’ve all used the talk-to-text feature on your smart phone, right?
How’s that working for you?
Kinda scary when you speak clearly into your phone, enunciate every word perfectly (or so you think) and instead of asking your spouse to grab milk and bread on their way home, it comes out something like “can you milk the damn bird?” and you’re left thinking do I really sound like that? Am I drunk? Am I slurring? Do we even have a bird?
None of these things are true.
Your smart phone just has no idea what you’re talking about. To fully illustrate that point, my last name is McCandless.
I’ve never had a different last name.
Tell that to my smart phone, who autocorrects “McCandless” to “McChicken” every.single.time.
It was mildly amusing until my online purchases started showing up addressed to “Cathy McChicken” and that’s where I draw the line.
I don’t even like McChickens and am more of a Quarter Pounder with Cheese girl myself. In other words, “smart” phone, now you’ve gone too far.
My personal favourite reason why AI can’t compete with a human is where the title to this blog comes in: The Legend of Toothpick Nancy. The following is a truthful account of how humans will always have the ability to reason, dissect, and come out on top when it comes to important things like the words we use and how we understand them.
A colleague at my firm came to me one day with a conundrum. She had a witness who spoke so quickly that her words were often indiscernible.
This is often a major issue in our line of work, and telling people to slow down so that we can understand them well enough to write/type every word they’re saying is generally pointless.
Asking someone to slow down is like asking someone to walk differently.
It’ll work for a few seconds, maybe a minute, but humans will always default back to their usual practices. Court reporters always ask for people to slow down, but realistically we know it likely won’t change a thing.
My colleague, who is an absolutely stellar court reporter, realized when she was listening to the backup audio from her discovery (in order to edit and complete the transcript that had been ordered) that the woman had spoken so fast that there was a phrase that my colleague had missed.
My colleague asked me if I would listen to the audio portion she was stuck on to help her figure out what was being said.
I said no problem.
This is common amongst court reporters, and although generally we do ask immediately during a discovery if we don’t hear/understand what the witness is saying (another vote for a human here, because NO robot is doing that!), unfortunately this witness had spoken so fast that a bunch of words had slurred together, making them indiscernible.
I put my headphones on.
My colleague hit “play” on her audio. I listened.
I said can you slow the audio down? My colleague did so. I listened again.
I said can you speed the audio up? My colleague did that, too.
After listening to it multiple times, I took the headphones off and said, very clinically as if I was wearing a white coat with a stethoscope around my neck, “Toothpick Nancy. Sorry, that’s all I get, Toothpick Nancy.”
My colleague laughed, because she had heard something similar, but didn’t want to tell me that to avoid prejudicing my ears.
Hmm. Toothpick Nancy. Toothpick Nancy?
Tooooothpiiiiiick Naaaannnnncy.
What else could it possibly be?
Well, I mean, umm, it would be literally anything other than Toothpick Nancy, because I’ve heard a lot of weird things said in my career but the words “Toothpick Nancy” have never been two of those words, said together at least.
Because my colleague and I are not AI robots, we conferred together over the next couple of days about this predicament.
Also, because we are not AI robots, we COULD confer over the next couple of days. Last time I checked, AI platforms don’t “confer” with each other over much, if anything.
We kind of made a game out of it. That’s another thing AI doesn’t do, at least not to my knowledge. And no, we could not figure these words out using context, although we tried very hard to do so.
Add that to the list of things that AI is not great at, using reasoning to consider context and what may or may not actually make sense.
Why did we care so much?
Why were we so concerned with getting the words correct and making sure my colleague provided a verbatim transcript, which is what our clients are paying for? Simply put, it’s our job to do so, and a job that we take immense pride in.
We WANT your words to be correct, and we want them to be preserved in your transcript the way they were said and the way they were meant.
This is the service you are paying for, and the service you should receive. It’s called providing a quality product. It’s called getting what you paid for. It’s important.
It shouldn’t just be important for the court reporter, it should especially be important to you, as our client, and to the client(s) you represent.
After a couple of days of Toothpick Nancy living in my brain rent-free, with no idea what the words actually were, I got a text from my colleague.
Her brain had been Toothpick Nancy-ing for so long that even in her subconscious it was being worked on, unjumbled and rejumbled, slowed down and sped up and reworked, until in the middle of the night she sat up, out of a deep sleep, and blurted out…”two pregnancies!!”
And there we have it, “Toothpick Nancy” was “two pregnancies”. Mystery solved!
You know what would’ve been on that transcript had AI been the author? Either nothing, because AI wouldn’t have picked up the words at all due to the speed of talking, or Toothpick Nancy. Neither are acceptable, because AI doesn’t care.
Let me repeat that: AI does not care about you or your transcript. AI doesn’t have a reputation to protect. AI doesn’t care if it looks stupid. AI doesn’t have emotions.
You know who cares about your final product? Court reporters. Our reputation is on the line with every document we produce and sign our name to. We actually care. It is our job to care.
When you get an AI transcript, there’s no do-overs. There’s no asking someone to slow down. There’s no clarifying or asking someone to repeat. God forbid if someone has a cough or sneezing fit that blocks the audio. Trust me, if it’s garbage in, then it’s garbage out.
I had a lawyer say to me recently that he wanted me to give him an AI summary of the discovery we had just completed. I politely declined, stating that that is not something I’m comfortable doing because I would not sign my name to certify anything that is not fully my product and that would not be reflective of the proceedings. He said to me “Yeah, AI transcripts are complete garbage, but I guess they’re better than nothing.” What?
You’ve done the prep, you’ve showed up, you’ve interviewed the witness, you’ve conferred with the client(s) you represent. You’ve put in the TIME. Don’t let AI give you garbage that’s better than nothing.
As lawyers, I know the valuable hours you put into preparing for an Examination for Discovery, or for any other legal proceeding you are prepping for, because you often tell me.
You’ve put aside evenings and weekends and spent time away from your family so you could prep effectively.
My question to you would be don’t you want those words said in your examination to be preserved as accurately as possible?
Do you want your transcript to be reflective of exactly what was said, or are you prepared to “make do” with some AI approximation that may be missing chunks of testimony, and misinterpreting what you’ve said and what the witness has said, all to save a few bucks?
Is that serving you, and ultimately your clients, well?
Certified court reporters sign our names to every transcript we do. That means you have our word that we have gone over the transcript multiple times and deemed it worthy of our signatures stating this work product has been done “to the best of our skill and ability”. We are the gold standard of what you should expect and AI is not. Our pride is in our signatures. Let us help you uphold the integrity of your record, because we actually care about what leaves our desks and ends up on yours.
