Court Reporter vs Digital Recorder

Are you a legal assistant scheduling a deposition and considering using a digital recording service rather than a stenographer? You may be wondering what’s the difference? The end result is the same, a verbatim written transcript. Or is it? Both a court reporter and a digital recorder are human beings operating a machine. The court reporter uses a steno machine and a digital recorder is operated by an operator. It’s a natural assumption that the digital recorder machine would do a better and more efficient job than a court reporter writing to a steno machine. One simply has to look at all the machines that make our lives simpler and easier.  Washing your clothes in a washing machine beats pounding them against a rock any day. This assumption, however, doesn’t hold true when it comes to preparing a verbatim transcript.

Here’s three differences between a court reporter and a digital recorder:

1.  A court reporter thinks and hears – in the moment. If something doesn’t make sense, a word isn’t heard or something is mumbled, the court reporter is right there and can ask for clarification. A digital recorder just records the proceedings and if something doesn’t make sense or isn’t heard because of ambient noise such as papers rustling or doors opening and closing – sorry for your luck.
2. A court reporter’s process is efficient. Using computer-aided transcription, the spoken word is instantly translated as the proceedings are occurring into a document that just needs to be edited, not typed word for word. If a transcript is requested from a digital recording, the document needs to be typed from scratch.
3. A court reporter is always “on”. A digital recorder may or may not work or may or not be turned on, and no one knows until it’s too late.
   
   
   The next time you are trying to decide between using a court reporter or digital recorder, consider these three important differences.