One of the most significant contributing causes of court reporter curtailment is the skill required to enter the profession. On average, court reporters can certainly type 225 words per minute. To put this number in prospect, the typical office worker typewrites 75 words per minute with precision. The simple truth is, court reporting needs a skill that can be difficult to get.
According to the National Court Reporting Association, reduced graduation and elevated retirement rates have generated a shortage of nearly 5,500 court reporters. As the average age of columnists continues to rise, more young people must join the field to keep up with the demand. The NCRA asserts that “the permanent shortage of stenographic court columnists impersonates a one-time, substantial possibility for those endeavoring a lucrative career with a stable future.”
What Is Court Journalism Like Today?
The Convention of the legal system has increased steeply in recent years. In fact, since 1993, public and criminal filing rates have risen by over 30%. Given the high need for their services, Atlanta court reporters are facing heightened caseloads. Many courts have adapted to automation and artificial intelligence to keep the justice system moving to fill the gaps in their operations.
How Can Technology Help Solve the Shortage?
Although no one in the legal industry supports court reporters' replacement, artificial intelligence and recording technology create an opportunity to boost efficiency and lower operating costs without compromising accuracy. For example, simply videotaping court proceedings can allow for time-shifting, meaning that certified court reporters could handle transcription as soon as they are available.
One of the most significant limitations to technological advancement is widespread distrust. After years of reporter transcription, many believe that artificial intelligence cannot function as well as humans. The truth is, AI-driven transcription can work in real-time, giving immediate results.
Workers in almost all businesses encounter some anxieties when facing the onset of technology — and sensibly so. Substituting human jobs with technology has become a frequently common phenomenon and relevant topic in our society. When faced with this, it’s natural to fall into a pessimistic thought spiral, to envision a dystopian doom where robots take over the world.
Court Reporting Will Endure the Test of Time
Arguments for effectively replacing certified court reporters are often more visionary than realistic. While embracing technology may be a cost-saving measure for the courts, those costs do not escape. Many claim that audio and video recordings come with hidden fees that will shift from the courts to the solicitors — and therefore to the clients.
In many cases, transcriptions of these tapes cost more than an endorsed transcript from a court reporter. Most legal experts will testify that human court reporters remain indispensable to the legal process.
Despite technological advancements, digital recordings frequently malfunction, leading to fragmented and garbled attestation. Recording the subtleties of human language (altered by accents, sentiment, foreign language, overlapping speech, etc.) still needs human judgment. While technology is a valuable tool for court reporters, many consider that it cannot fully reinstate their skills, experience, and humanity.
According to the NCRA, the mediocre age of stenographers in America is over 54. Stenographic business schools are rapidly shutting off, and the remaining schools cannot keep up with the market.
The NCRA has been foretelling a shortfall of over 5,000 reporters per year. In short, court reporters will age out of the workforce over the next 20 years and not be substituted. You can still see timely court reporters because digital court reporters have fulfilled the void left by retiring stenographers. They are accountable for taking millions of pages of transcripts per year and are quickly gracing the most common type of reporter being in and out of state courtrooms.
Digital reporters can create transcripts more conveniently and efficiently, leading to lower prices, increased accuracy, and faster turnaround times. Discontinuing digital reporters would halt the progress of all lawsuits as attorneys would have to schedule months in advance to find a typist who is available. Meanwhile, prices would skyrocket while customer choice plummets. It just does not make sense.
Looking Forward
While voice verification software will not be substituting court reporters anytime soon, it would be naïve to believe that technology will never catch up. The best way for court reporting to secure against a “tech takeover” is to adjust to new technology.
Just as court reporters once patronized out quills and inkwells for stenographs, now they must embrace computer-aided transcription and voice identification software.
Most court reporters already own. Technology is converting our legal system and world massively. However, humans proceed to be the wielders and monitors of that technology, and human perception remains indispensable.
When facing the fears of technological advancements in the workplace, professionals must be prepared to accustom, educate, and retrain themselves to work within the new technical structure. The legal industry can and will do exactly that. Elizabeth Gallo’s court reporters will unquestionably endure the coming decade and make the firm one of the best court reporting firms in Atlanta. Perhaps they will be described as “court technologists” instead.