SCOTTSDALE, AZ – September 8, 2025 – TheRecordXchange (TRX), a leading provider of SaaS solutions for rich media management in courtrooms and hearing rooms globally, today announced strategic leadership appointments designed to accelerate innovation and growth in the legal technology sector.

Eric Parsons has been appointed Chief Executive Officer, effective September 15, 2025. Parsons brings over 25 years of executive and technology leadership experience, with an extensive background in scaling IT organizations, developing high-performing teams, and establishing organizational governance structures that drive business value. A USC graduate, Parsons has a proven track record of delivering results in enterprise technology environments.

Steve Townsend, CEO of TheRecordXchange and a 30-year veteran of the court reporting and legal technology industry, will become Chief Product Officer and Chairman of the Board.

“Steve’s vision has built TheRecordXchange into the innovative force it is today,” said Eric Parsons. “I’m honored to lead the company forward while Steve focuses on the product strategy that differentiates us in the market. His continued leadership role in the company ensures continuity of vision while we scale operations to meet growing market demand.”

“I have complete confidence in Eric’s leadership and am grateful to have someone of his caliber taking the helm,” said Townsend. “I’m excited to dedicate myself fully to the product vision that we believe will transform how courts, judges and attorneys use and manage the official record of courtroom proceedings. With our exceptional new leadership team, I’m more excited than ever about our company’s future.”

Expanded Technology Leadership

The company expansion comes as TheRecordXchange strengthens its executive team following a recent funding round. Seth Markowitz has been promoted to Chief Technology Officer, where he will focus on technical vision, architecture, and strategic technology planning. Markowitz has been instrumental in building TheRecordXchange’s technical foundation over the last 10 years.

Tom Zaleski has joined the company as Vice President of Engineering. Zaleski brings over 20 years of software product development expertise with a demonstrated ability to transform and scale engineering organizations. During his tenure at IPRO, he led a global product development organization of 50 employees across three countries.

Erik Lige continues in his role as Vice President of Sales, where his leadership has been critical in building strong customer relationships and driving the company’s market expansion.

“Our TRX team’s exceptional work has positioned us perfectly for this growth phase and enabled us to attract the top-tier talent joining us today,” added Townsend.

“I’m incredibly impressed by the strength and talent of the TRX team,” said Parsons. “Together, we’re positioned to accelerate delivery of innovative solutions that transform how courts manage and leverage their digital court record. The foundation this team has built gives us tremendous momentum as we enter this next chapter.”

About TheRecordXchange

TheRecordXchange provides industry-leading SaaS solutions for the management of rich media content in courtrooms and hearing rooms worldwide. The company’s platform enables courts to efficiently capture, manage, transcribe, and distribute audio and video recordings, supporting the administration of justice through advanced technology solutions.

Download the Full Press Release — LINK

For more information about TheRecordXchange and its solutions, visit www.trxchange.com.

Media Contact: Eric Parsons, CEO [email protected]

The post TheRecordXchange Announces Strategic Leadership Expansion appeared first on TheRecordXchange.

The post Proofing Template appeared first on TheRecordXchange.

Indiana Transcribe Only

Oregon Transcribe Only

Nevada Transcribe Only

Nevada DOAH Transcribe Only

Nevada DETR Transcribe Only – Department of Employment/Training

Colorado Transcribe Only

Hawaii – Office of Disciplinary Counsel – Transcribe Only

Arizona Transcribe Only

Maryland Transcribe Only

Minnesota Transcribe Only

Washington Transcribe Only

Federal District Court Transcribe Only

341 Hearings Transcribe Only

Deposition Transcribe Only

DOHA Transcribe Only

General Interview Template

The post Templates appeared first on TheRecordXchange.

June 1, 2023, Elkhart, IN – The Circuit and Superior Courts for Elkhart County, Indiana today announced the official launch of its online portal for courtroom digital audio recording requests. In partnership with TheRecordXchange, this innovative online service will allow lawyers, private parties, government agencies and others to request audio recordings of proceedings quickly and easily. Required payments can be made online, and recordings are delivered securely via TheRecordXchange portal.

“Our partnership with TheRecordXchange will allow us to provide greater access to justice and a very efficient order, payment and delivery process via our secure website,” said Judge David C. Bonfiglio, Administrative Judge for the Circuit and Superior Courts for Elkhart County. “This site will eliminate the need to complete and deliver physical order forms, make in person payments or burn and deliver CD’s. With TheRecordXchange, the entire process is far more efficient for court staff and, more importantly, for the attorneys and litigants we serve.”

Simply access the court’s portal at https://elkhartcounty-in.trxchange.net, and complete an online form. You can create an account in TheRecordXchange and make payment, as needed, using the site’s secure e-commerce solution. Users have access to their account 24/7 via any computer, laptop, tablet or smart phone.

Once an audio recording request is reviewed and approved by court staff, the customer is notified and can log in to review the recording. The TRX web player is a simple-to-use and intuitive streaming player that delvers multi-channel playback for the best possible audio review experience.

TheRecordXchange also provides an online support tool that allow users to ask questions and obtain live support if needed.

“TheRecordXchange is excited to add the Circuit and Superior Courts for Elkhart County, Indiana to the growing list of court jurisdictions that have discovered the benefits of bringing the management and distribution of the court record online.” According to Steve Townsend, CEO of TheRecordXchange, “Court Administrator Ross Maxwell and his team have been great to work with during deployment. We know that TheRecordXchange and Elkhart County court staff can make your access to the court record as simple and efficient as possible.”

About TheRecordXchange

TheRecordXchange (www.trxchange.com) offers simple, seamless, and secure solutions to help courts manage the record of proceedings. The company offers the most advanced, online workflow solution to streamline the process of organizing, ordering, and delivering the record of legal proceedings. TheRecordXchange platform is designed specifically for courts of all sizes.

The post TRX Elkhart County Partnership appeared first on TheRecordXchange.

We are excited to announce the release of this Case Study on TheRecordXchange and our Transcription / Media management solutions; in partnership with Marion County Superior Courts and AWS (Amazon Web Services).

We’ve included an excerpt from the Case Study as well as a link to download the original document from the GovTech website.  You’ll need to register on their site for access

The courts of Marion County, Indiana, serve a populace of nearly 1 million. Preserving evidence is one of the court system’s most important duties. A recent update of the courts’ records management system made critical court operations more efficient and user-friendly for legal professionals and the public.

Moreover, Marion County’s experience during the COVID-19 pandemic illustrates the potential for cloud technologies and modern software to add new capabilities like remote trials and hearings….

Click to download entire PDF article — LINK

The post TRX, Marion County, and AWS Case Study appeared first on TheRecordXchange.

Will I receive both the audio AND a transcript of my 341 Meeting of Creditors?|

Yes. Once you submit your Order, the audio recording of your 341 Meeting of Creditors will be acquired from the U.S. Trustee Office where the meeting was held. Your request will then be updated to reflect the estimated cost of a certified transcript from the recording. You will be notified via email to make your deposit payment via credit card.  Once the transcript is complete, you will be notified and you can download both the audio and transcript right from the deliverables tab in your online Order.

How long will it take to get my audio and transcript?|

TheRecordXchange will make an immediate request for the audio from the US Trustee’s Office specified in your Order. Once the audio is received and the deposit is paid, we will provide a due date.  You always have the opportunity to negotiate expedited service.

What will my total cost be?

341 Hearings, audio and hearing transcript, final cost will be determined based on the final page count of the transcript. A refund will be applied or a final balance will be requested.

Who will produce the transcript and will it be certified?

TheRecordXchange is highly qualified Bankruptcy transcription company that works with over 30 US Bankruptcy Courts across the country. The court reporters and transcribers who work in TheRecordXchange are among the best and most experienced professionals in the industry. Your transcript will include a certification page indicating that it is a true and accurate transcription of your hearing. The transcript will be valid for use in court or for any official filing purposes. TheRecordXchange is always available for support.

What information do I need to place an order?

You will need the following information to place your Order:

1. The state where the hearing took place
2. The US Trustee Region (after you select the appropriate state, only the regions in that state will be listed)
3. The matter name and number
4. The name of the Trustee who officiated the meeting.
5. The filing Chapter, 7, 11, 12 or 13
6. The date(s) of the 341 Meeting. You can select multiple dates.

How do I pay for my Order?

You can pay instantly on the site via credit card. Visa, MasterCard or American Express are all accepted. You can also send a check or money order, but your order will not be processed until payment is received and cleared.

How long will it take to get my audio and transcript?

TheRecordXchange will make an immediate request for the audio from the US Trustee’s Office specified in your Order. Once the audio is received, you can choose the time frame for TheRecordXchange to complete your Order.

How will I receive my audio and transcript?

When your Order is complete, you will receive an e-mail notification directing you to log in to your account. The audio and hearing transcript will both be available for you to download on the “deliverables” tab of the Order. The hearing transcript will be in PDF format and the audio will be either an MP3 file or a Windows Media file. You should have no problem playing the audio on your PC or Mac, but if you do run into issues, you can contact your transcription provider directly or contact TheRecordXchange via e-mail at [email protected] and we can help.

How will I know when my audio and transcript will be available?

When your transcript and audio are ready, you will receive an e-mail notification at the e-mail address you used to register for your account. You can also return to your Order any time to check the status.

What do I do if I find an error in transcript?

TheRecordXchange is one of the best vendors in the industry, but mistakes can happen. If you find an error that is important for you to have corrected, let us know. You can leave a message right in your Order on the Messages tab and your transcription provider will be notified. Once we confirm the need for a correction, an amended version of the transcript will be delivered to you as quickly as possible. If you have any concerns with the process, you can always e-mail TheRecordXchange at [email protected].

Can I cancel my order?

Yes, if you cancel the Order prior to audio being acquired, you can cancel your Order by simply sending an e-mail to [email protected] and put CANCEL ORDER #9-XXXXXX in the subject line. Your deposit will be refunded. If we have already acquired the audio, you can no longer cancel the Order, but the audio will be made available to you.

Is TheRecordXchange part of the US Trustee’s Office?

No. TheRecordXchange is a private company based in Scottsdale, Arizona. We offer a modern and efficient platform for legal professionals to access experienced and certified court reporters and transcribers. With nearly 1,000 professionals working in the platform, legal professionals can access the most qualified and cost effective resources available for immediate turnaround.

Click here to request a quote for your 341 transcript order.

Here’s what legal professionals are saying about TRX:

“Having ordered several transcripts from TheRecordXchange over the past month, I can say that the service has been easy, efficient and cost effective. TheRecordXchange takes care of everything, all we needed to do was place the order online, they do the rest. Transcripts and audio were delivered online and were professionally prepared. We would absolutely recommend TheRecordXchange to anyone seeking audio and transcripts of a meeting of creditors!”

Patti J. Sullivan, Chapter 7 Trustee, St. Paul, MN

“I found my secret weapon. TheRecordXchange makes securing transcripts a breeze and gives me back time in my day to focus on the cases that really matter. Their platform is intuitive and incredibly easy to use, and with a push of a button, my order was placed and they took care of the rest. I highly recommend TheRecordXchange to anyone looking for a secure, reliable way to order transcripts.”

Katie Brandt, Paralegal, Anastassiou & Associates, Salinas, CA

The post 341 Meeting of Creditors – How to Get My Audio Recording and Transcript with Ease appeared first on TheRecordXchange.

Technological advancements in digital reporting and stenographer shortages are now impacting the legal market in all regions of the country. When markets become disrupted, it is always messy and confusing. However, what we see happening today is not the beginning stages of disruption, it is an inflection point indicating that changes in the market will begin to accelerate, eventually reaching a new and stable state once again – at least until the next disrupter hits.

This inflection can be thought of as the point where a technology or method transitions into the mainstream market. In the case of court reporting, digital reporting is expanding from the courtroom into the deposition room. Since depositions represent as much as two-thirds of the total court reporting market, this is a significant moment in the adoption cycle.

While digital reporting seems new to many in the legal market, it has been a standard part of courtroom infrastructure for years. Introduced into the courtroom in the mid-1990s, digital reporting is now installed and operating in nearly all jurisdictions in the U.S. and much of the rest of the world. Understanding the courts’ experience with digital reporting adoption can provide important insights into what to expect in the deposition market.

Lessons Learned and the Whole Product Solution

Stenographic courtroom reporters, referred to as officials, operate in a very different manner from deposition reporters. While the foundational skills can be employed in either environment, the processes and daily activities are quite different. This is true for digital reporting as well. The technology is basically the same whether it is being used in the deposition room or the courtroom, but the business processes are very different. These variations are driven by the fact that each market has its own requirements.

Digital reporting in the courtroom incorporates multiple microphones recording into at least four separate channels of audio. The microphones are connected to a mixing device that is often integrated with the courtroom’s public address system. The recording solution is configured to capture multiple channels of audio to accommodate several speakers in a large, open space. The system can also be installed in the room permanently, allowing cables and hardware devices to be affixed to set locations and concealed.

In a deposition setting, the recording solution must be portable and easily configured. Professional gear and multichannel recording software are still essential, but the size of the room and the number of speakers are usually more limited than in courtroom environments. Both deposition and the courtroom reporting systems should be operated by qualified reporters who know their equipment and understand procedures.

Early digital recording vendors understood and addressed the specific needs of the court. Systems were configured to accommodate the unique recording environment, and features were designed to meet the needs of judges, court monitors and transcribers. The market needs were studied, and a whole solution was delivered. Digital reporting will not be fully adopted in the deposition market until providers offer the broad legal community an equally comprehensive deposition solution. That solution must produce a timely and accurate record consistently, including written transcripts, without requiring significant changes in deposition procedures.

The courtroom experience has proven that, when managed properly, digital reporting can provide highly accurate transcripts in a tight time frame. Companies offering digital reporting of depositions must demonstrate the same success. As a buyer of deposition reporting services, you need to make sure that you are engaging professional firms that can provide quality service on a regular basis.

Creating a service that can produce an accurate record is the easy part; streamlining the reporting process and making sure that customers are completely comfortable with the method are the real challenges.

That’s Not the Way We’ve Always Done It!

The courtroom market offered a number of advantages for the early technology providers. Court administrators were highly motivated by cost savings, which was a benefit digital recording could easily deliver. Court administration still had to make sure that digital recording met the requirements of the judges and other courtroom participants, but they were happy to advocate for modified business processes to achieve the anticipated cost savings.

Frankly, it was also an advantage that these court administrators were not indoctrinated into many of the legal industry’s long-established traditions and workflows. Viewing processes through fresh eyes allowed court administration to see the benefits of digital reporting quickly. And because court administration usually had direct influence over the rule-making process that can often impede adoption, rule and statute changes could be pursued efficiently when needed. The deposition market presents a much less centralized decision-making process and thus some unique challenges.

Courts have only their own set of rules to manage and the laws of just one state regarding issues such as reporter licensing. But providers and customers in the deposition market must navigate rules of civil procedures, licensing requirements and state laws from all over the country. National associations and service providers are working now to change antiquated rules and laws, but the process will take some time and leave practitioners and customers confused and hesitant in the interim. While this change is occurring, the best practice is to make it clear in a deposition notice that an alternative method of capture is being used and stipulate the same on the record.

Since court administration has full control over the physical infrastructure in their facilities, digital recording systems could be installed in an elegant manner. Depositions require portability and flexibility. Providers must rely on individual digital reporters to configure different rooms. The configurations must be able to capture audio and video accurately and not be intrusive for the participants. Technical and operational solutions can be deployed today, but the management of the process on a day-to-day basis is very new to the firms just entering the market.

The court market has one other advantage: the judge. Not to say that all judges were fully supportive of digital recording over the years, but their presence in the room was critical. Court administrators were able to focus 100% of their hiring and training efforts on recording and note-taking, leaving the judge to control courtroom behavior. That simplified things a lot. In the deposition world, your court reporting firm takes on some of that load.

Professional deposition reporters, whether digital or steno, know how to manage a deposition. They understand that they are officers of the court and responsible for the record of a deposition. That means that good reporters know how to manage attorneys and witnesses when they need to. That is not a skill that comes easily to a lot of people. Without the support of a judge in the room, all deposition reporters must know how to look after themselves and others. This is just one more reason why you should always rely on a reputable provider that can ensure that all the complex logistics for the deposition will be taken care of.

So Who’s Got It Right?

There are lots of court reporting firms introducing a digital reporting offering for depositions. Whether it is a new service or not, many of them do know what they are doing. But even the best of them would have to admit that there is more to learn.
The inflection point is upon us. Over the next few years, consumers of deposition services will see plenty of changes. Stick with your reliable and professional providers and you will be happy with the results. Your stenographic court reporter will probably be around for quite a while longer, but don’t be concerned about the future – it is bright and includes digital!

About the Author
Steve Townsend is CEO of TheRecordXchange, a web‐based platform for court reporting professionals. He has extensive experience in courtroom and hearing room reporting and transcription. He was CEO of FTR from 1997 to 2007 and CEO of AVTranz from 2008 to 2015. Townsend is a co‐founder of the American Association of Electronic Reporters and Transcribers.

The post Digital Reporting: Back to the Future appeared first on TheRecordXchange.

CTC 2019 was held last month in New Orleans. This biennial court technology conference is the largest conference of its kind and always a great opportunity to see where technology vendors are focused with their court offerings. This year was all about artificial intelligence. Vendors of every sort were touting their latest AI-enabled applications – some of them brilliant and some of them boring. All of the digital recording vendors were demonstrating some form of speech recognition. None of them claimed to be able to produce an acceptable transcript, much less a certified transcript, but applying speech recognition to closed captioning and assisted listening looked like some potentially viable solutions. Full disclosure: my company, TheRecordXchange, also offers a speech recognition solution called VoiceCopy. We do not claim that the technology can produce an adequate transcript yet either.

How Good Is the Technology?

I first began working with speech recognition technology in the late 1990s as CEO of FTR (For The Record). Even 20 years ago there were serious companies with plenty of cash trying to crack this nut. The technology has improved dramatically, and it continues to advance at a rapid pace.

There are two significant factors that have changed the landscape for speech recognition. First, as expected, the technologies related to artificial intelligence, machine learning and neural networks have matured. Equally important, big tech, most notably Google, Amazon and Apple have created services that collect unfathomable amounts of voice data. Alexa, Google Home, Siri and other applications amass valuable data by the second. For machine learning, data is gold and big tech has cornered the market.

Big tech is great at solving big problems. But it rarely tries to meet the needs of niche markets. Addressing the specific requirements of court reporting and transcription is exactly what some of the companies at CTC and a handful of innovative startups are trying to do. Google and Amazon rely on these ventures to service niche markets based on the technology they have developed. Smaller companies with domain expertise understand that transcripts must be punctuated accurately, present accurate speaker identifications and be formatted to meet the specifications for different jurisdictions.
Most companies acknowledge that an acceptable legal transcript cannot be produced from current speech technology alone. So what is their answer? Some are promoting their solutions not for transcription but for closed captioning or assisted hearing. Some have given up on the court reporting market and focus resources on markets with less stringent accuracy and formatting requirements. But some are offering a transcription solution that combines AI with human input to produce an acceptable transcript.

AI with a Human Touch

The AI/human strategy uses automatic speech recognition to complete the first pass of transcription. Transcription is the most labor-intensive part of the process, so if that can be automated, it’s a big win. Then, a qualified proofreader, using appropriately designed tools, reviews and corrects the transcript. The review process will take longer than if the proofreader were reviewing a transcript produced by a qualified transcriber, but any additional time and money spent on the proofing process is more than made up for by the savings achieved from the automated transcription.

Today, the transcription providers may be benefiting from this cost savings, but savings may not be passed on to transcript purchasers. But if transcript users are getting an accurate transcript, they probably don’t care.

The big beneficiary of this model is the technology provider. Remember my comment above about data being gold to AI developers? This is equally true for these startups chasing opportunities in the court reporting market. These companies will never be able to collect as much data as Amazon can, but they don’t need to.

Machine learning, a subset of AI, can be divided into two types: supervised learning or unsupervised learning. When you ask Alexa a question or give it a command, if you accept the response, then Alexa “infers” that its recognition was accurate. If, however, you repeat the request after a response, then the system may infer that its recognition was incorrect. This is an example of unsupervised learning; there is no established truth to be fed back into the system, only inference. Unsupervised learning can take a long time and requires a lot of data.
Supervised learning is based on the idea that there is a known truth. With a transcript, there is something close to a known truth. Accurate final transcripts can be fed back into the system for learning purposes. The system can compare the automated results with the “truth” of the final transcript and make adjustments for future processing. Supervised learning can achieve results much faster and requires far less data to get meaningful improvement. So an AI/human process that results in the technology provider having access to final transcripts can also result in a significant competitive advantage. Eventually, improvements will certainly benefit transcript users, but in the meantime . . .

So with AI/Human Processes, Can I Get Good Transcripts?

Probably not. And, here’s why.

When you receive an accurate, certified transcript today, that transcript was likely produced by a qualified transcriber and reviewed by a qualified proofreader. Think of the proofreader as the quality assurance step in the process. Good transcription firms have well-developed processes using qualified and efficient teams of transcribers and proofreaders producing quality results. Quality does not happen just because the individuals are good; it happens when qualified individuals follow a good process.

Harold F. Dodge, one of the original architects of the science of statistical quality control stated that “You cannot inspect quality into a product.” And, to paraphrase W. Edwards Deming, the father of modern quality control science, proofreading does not improve the quality of the transcript. The quality, good or bad, is already in the transcript.

As a practical matter, what this means is that a qualified proofreader can consistently review and complete accurate transcripts when receiving quality work from transcribers. The lower the quality of the original content is, the lower the quality of the finished product will be. Automated transcripts are of far lower quality than those produced by qualified transcribers. Proofreaders cannot consistently turn them into high-quality transcripts. As of today, you will be disappointed in the results.

To quote W. Edwards Deming, this AI/human combo is a “system of make-and-inspect, which if applied to making toast would be expressed as: ‘You burn, I’ll scrape.’”

If Not Today, When?

Predicting that something is going to happen is easy. Predicting when is not easy – timing is everything. It is safe to say that automated speech recognition systems will become the standard method for transcript production in many industries, including court reporting. Is it ready today? No.

Will it be ready in a year?
No.

Will it be ready in five years?
Maybe.

Ten years?
Probably.

If you are a classic early adopter and want to live on the bleeding edge, go for it. If you want to go into court with an accurate transcript from a witness deposition, hire a qualified court reporting firm and make sure your transcript is produced by a qualified transcriber and proofreader.

About the Author:
Steve Townsend is CEO of TheRecordXchange, a web‐based platform for court reporting professionals. He has extensive experience in courtroom and hearing room reporting and transcription. He was CEO of FTR from 1997 to 2007 and CEO of AVTranz from 2008 to 2015. Townsend is a co‐founder of the American Association of Electronic Reporters and Transcribers.

The post Automatic Speech Recognition in Court Reporting — It’s Toast! appeared first on TheRecordXchange.

I once had a federal judge explain to me, in detail and with great conviction, that digital recording would never be adopted as an acceptable court reporting method. His argument was simple: Digital recording was fine, but judges and lawyers needed a written record. Since getting a transcript from a recording was difficult, time-consuming, error-prone and expensive, the method would never work. I owned a successful court transcription business at the time, but that was not enough for him to reconsider his position. Interestingly, this discussion occurred in the ForTheRecord booth at a court technology conference. FTR was already the leading provider of digital court recording software with thousands of systems installed in courtrooms around the world.

That was not the first time, nor the last, I heard this misunderstanding about transcription from digital recordings.

How Transcription Works

Tens of millions of court and deposition transcript pages are produced successfully every year from digital recordings. While different firms and transcribers have developed different processes for completing accurate and timely transcripts, the basics are the same. So if you have been wondering how recordings from court proceedings and depositions get typed, a brief description of the process may help.

Professional court and deposition recordings are captured in multiple channels. Recordings may capture two, four or even eight separate channels or tracks. The recording file(s) can be copied to physical media, such as a USB drive or a DVD. It is also common for recordings to be uploaded to the cloud for long-term storage and distribution to transcribers and others who need access to them.

Once a deposition has been recorded, your court reporting firm will select one or more transcribers and assign the recordings to those individuals for transcription. Most professional transcribers work from home, and once assigned, they can download the recordings and the reporter’s log notes from the cloud to begin transcription.

Legal transcriptionists use different transcription applications depending on the type of media they have been provided. All professional legal transcription applications allow users to play the recording on their computer, listen to audio via headphones and watch proceedings on the screen if video was captured. Transcription applications allow the transcriber to isolate channels to focus on specific speakers, control the volumes for each channel separately and use a variety of other features designed specifically for transcribing recordings with multiple speakers.

These professional legal transcription applications, along with a fully functional foot pedal and high-quality headphones, allow a qualified transcriber to listen to the audio and transcribe the record in standard legal formats. Transcription may be performed in Microsoft Word, WordPerfect or stenographic software such as Case CATalyst or Eclipse.

Transcriptionists Are Trained Professionals

The person who recorded your deposition may also transcribe the recording, but more often than not, your court reporting firm will assign one or more qualified individuals the task of transcribing. In the past, transcripts may have been produced by individuals with little or no formal training or a certification. That has changed.

Today, organizations such as the American Association of Electronic Reporters and Transcribers provide extensive support, best practices guidance and certification opportunities for the digital court reporting industry. Reputable transcription and court reporting firms will contract only with qualified individuals who are either certified or preparing for certification.

Accuracy of Transcripts

A proofreader will also be assigned to your transcription project. The proofreader is responsible for reviewing the transcript and audio in detail and making required corrections prior to completion and delivery.

Regardless of the reporting method used—steno or digital—minor errors can be expected. Professional court reporting associations acknowledge that all transcripts contain some minor errors, and each association has published specific guidelines as to what constitutes an error. There are also well-established strategies for “scoring” transcripts. The National Court Reporters Association requires testing at 95 percent accuracy for a stenographer to achieve its foundational certification of Registered Professional Reporter (RPR). The AAERT requires 98 percent accuracy for transcribers to achieve its foundational certification of Certified Electronic (digital) Transcriber (CET®). Either method, executed by a qualified individual, will provide an accurate and timely transcript.

Timeliness of Transcripts

It takes about three hours for an experienced transcriber to type an hour of recorded audio. A single transcriber can easily complete short depositions or court hearings that do not require a rush turnaround. However, longer recordings, such as trial transcripts, or transcripts that need to be delivered in a rush can be assigned to more than one transcriber.

Professional firms work with many qualified transcribers and proofreaders. These firms provide sophisticated, web-based tools to facilitate collaboration. Using these collaboration tools, digital reporters, transcribers and proofreaders can share spellings, chat about nuances in the proceedings, share research about the content and generally support each other to complete a highly accurate and timely transcript. This strategy allows firms to offer daily turnaround for transcripts of any size and even hourly turnaround if required.

Transcripts from Digital Reporting Work

Some claim that the reporter who was in the room to capture the record of proceedings is the individual best suited to produce an accurate transcript because that person was able to experience the event live. This thinking is intuitively attractive. However, it is simply not true. The technical features of modern recording and transcription applications, the power of effective collaboration and the “the wisdom of crowds within a crowd” combine to create an effective process that can produce highly accurate and timely transcripts.

The accuracy and timeliness of the transcription process I have described in this article have been studied extensively over the last 50 years. The bottom line is that transcription from digital recording works.

Once again, the question to ask when considering how to record and transcribe your next deposition is not which method is best. Regardless of the method, select a professional court reporting firm that has experience and well-established processes for recording depositions and producing accurate transcripts.

Of course, there is one more obvious question that you may be asking. Given artificial intelligence and the other technologies we have available today, why do we need humans to transcribe these recordings at all? Can’t Google or Alexa do it at no cost and in a fraction of the time? We’ll discuss that question in our next installment!

Steve Townsend is CEO of TheRecordXchange, a web‐based platform for court reporting professionals. He has extensive experience in courtroom and hearing room reporting and transcription. He was CEO of FTR from 1997 to 2007 and CEO of AVTranz from 2008 to 2015. Townsend is a co‐founder of the American Association of Electronic Reporters and Transcribers.

The post Digital Recording? Fine, but I still need a transcript appeared first on TheRecordXchange.

It has been widely reported that the number of active stenographic court reporters is declining rapidly. Court reporting schools are closing, graduation numbers are dropping and interest in the career is very low. This is all true.

Court reporting firms across the country have begun to schedule digital reporters, the most common alternative when a certified stenographer is not available. Digital reporters use digital audio recording devices to record court proceedings and depositions. Professional digital reporters take electronic notes that are synchronized to the recording, which allows for easy read-backs during the deposition. The synchronized notes also aid in the production of an accurate and timely transcript.

Court reporters have long been the official “keeper of the record.” They are trusted and professional. These individuals are often certified, and all have a formal court reporting education. The idea that this trained professional will not be in the deposition to manage the record is a bit disconcerting to many in the legal profession. It’s understandable. One might wonder if this newfangled method can be trusted?

A little history may help put your mind at ease.

The Federal Judicial Center, the research and education agency of the judicial branch of the U.S. government, conducted an in-depth study on the use of audio recording (tapes) to capture the official record of court proceedings in U.S. district courts. The report, A Comparative Evaluation of Stenographic and Audiotape Methods for United Stated District Court Reporting, was published in July 1983; yes, nearly 40 years ago. The study concluded that:

Given appropriate management and supervision, electronic sound recording can provide an accurate record of United States district court proceedings at reduced costs, without delay or interruption and provide the basis for accurate and timely transcript delivery.

Since 1983, of course, recording technology has advanced dramatically. A large professional community of digital reporters and transcribers has grown to service the rapidly increasing demand in the market. And, as of 2018, the majority of courtrooms and hearing rooms throughout North America operate digital recording systems daily.

So, as the study reported that it would, given appropriate management and supervision, audio recording of legal proceedings works very well.

Recently, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure were amended to allow for the unrestricted use of electronic recording to capture the official record in a deposition. And, by recently, I mean in 1993!

That’s right: Audio recording has been permitted under the FRCP for more than 25 years. While some states, including California, require notice and stipulation to use non-stenographic methods of recording in depositions, many states have no special requirements, and audio recording has been used successfully for decades.

The American Association of Electronic Reporters and Transcribers (AAERT) was founded in 1994 by a small group of audio reporting and transcription professionals. The founders recognized the need to support electronic court reporting by establishing best practices and certification programs. Today, AAERT offers certification for digital court reporters and transcribers nationwide. A certified electronic reporter, or CER, must demonstrate professional knowledge and skills in the use of modern digital recording technologies, court reporting rules and procedures, legal vocabulary and best practices for annotations and exhibit management. CERs must be a notary public in the state where they practice, ensuring that they can swear in witnesses.

A certified electronic transcriber, or CET, has been tested on proper transcription formatting, general court procedures and practices, legal and medical vocabulary and the operation of modern transcription software.

AAERT certification is recognized and frequently required by state judiciaries and government agencies. Compliance with AAERT standards for ethics, confidentiality and continuing education is required to maintain certification. By selecting AAERT-certified reporters and transcribers, you can be assured that you are working with true professionals.

Certified professionals are expected to abide by AAERT best practices. The AAERT Best Practices Guide provides a comprehensive and review of digital reporting and transcription in the court and deposition environments. The guide establishes the basis for certification preparation and serves as a framework for digital reporters and transcribers and their clients to understand the most efficient and reliable methods for capturing, producing and protecting the record of legal proceedings.

The current market turmoil is certainly not the first time that a traditional service has been disrupted by a new method, and it won’t be the last. The robustness and reliability of digital recording technology are self-evident. You record audio and video every day on your phone, your television and your computer. The legitimate concern with the transition to digital reporting of depositions has related to the person behind the recorder. The good news is that we already have a well-developed professional community with certifications and best practices ready to support you.

Make no mistake: If you have not had a problem scheduling a stenographic court reporter yet, you will. And when that happens, there is a good chance that your court reporting firm will send a digital reporter to cover your deposition. Should you be concerned when that happens? Not if you are scheduling through a reputable firm that hires professional, trained and certified digital reporters and transcribers. You trusted your court reporting firm before and you can trust it now.

But wait: I need a transcript. How do I get that? How long will it take? And how much will it cost?

Rest easy, we will cover that in the next article.

Link to Part 2 – Published 9/10/2019

Steve Townsend is CEO of TheRecordXchange, a web‐based platform for court reporting professionals. He has extensive experience in courtroom and hearing room reporting and transcription. He was CEO of FTR from 1997 to 2007 and CEO of AVTranz from 2008 to 2015. Townsend is a co‐founder of the American Association of Electronic Reporters and Transcribers.

The post Guarding the Deposition Record When a Stenographer is Nowhere in Sight appeared first on TheRecordXchange.