A fight is brewing in the court reporter industry over the acceptance and accuracy of digital court reporters. 

To be sure, no one disagrees that there's a critical shortage of court reporters in the United States. A 2014 report sponsored by the National Court Reporters Association (NCRA) stressed the dwindling supply of court reporters would lead to a nearly 5,500 shortfall in positions by 2018. 

In 2020 that shortfall hasn't improved, but NCRA president Roy "Max" Curry Jr. said digital reporters aren't the solution.

In a flyer, the association noted the integrity and accuracy of a digital court reporter's transcript "completely depends on the audio quality," and that the audio files used are "outsourced" for transcription, which jeopardizes sensitive information. What's more, the NCRA alleged there's no standard or certification for digital reporters.

Despite the hesitancy toward digital court reporting, the NCRA isn't against leveraging technology to deploy the limited amount of court reporters to more court and deposition proceedings.

In fact, Curry said the association supports leveraging video conferencing technology for court reporters to transcribe various proceedings remotely in one location. In a show of the growing acceptance for remote court reporting, last February Esquire Deposition Solutions launched a remote court reporter service where its court reporters can transcribe and process depositions across the country, where permitted, from Esquire offices.

Curry said the NCRA agrees with remote transcribing with video conferencing because, unlike digital court reporting, it doesn't solely rely on a court reporter transcribing prerecorded audio.

"It's just too risky to go down the road of this [electronic recording] stuff in regard to record integrity," Curry said. He added, "When digital media is altered it would take a digital expert to confirm it."

However, advocates for digital court reporters say the NCRA's claims are faulty and misguided.

Janet Harris, co-founder and president of the American Association of Electronic Reporters and Transcribers (AAERT), which co-wrote a response letter to the NCRA's flyer, took issue with the NCRA's claims that digital court reporters lack certification and standards.

She pointed to AAERT's electronic court reporter and electronic transcriber programs, which were established in 1995, and the association's best practices guide, as examples of the certification and ongoing guidance it provides digital court reporters.

Digital legal record-keeping advocate Speech-to-Text Institute, which was also a co-writer of the NCRA response letter, also took issue with some of NCRA's accusations.

"They have no basis to say that digital reporting with an actual digital reporter monitoring the system that ensures accuracy can deliver anything a stenographer can't do, except for perhaps real-time translation to see texts of proceedings," said Jim Cudahy, executive director of Speech-to-Text Institute and the former executive director of NCRA.

Harris also noted the AAERT's best practices guide requires certified reporters to make a redundant backup simultaneously to recording the proceeding. She said the NCRA's flyer might signify a fear of the technologically unknown.

"I think it's a point of view that is fueled by fear of the unknown and we are requesting in our letter with [Speech-to-Text Institute] that NCRA collaborate with the other court reporting associations. Research and data shows there's an extreme court reporter shortage across this country that will only increase."

Indeed, finding a resolution to the growing court reporter shortage has grabbed the legal and tech industry's attention.

AI-based transcription and captioning company Verbit, for example, said after its recent $31 million Series B funding round that it would continue to focus on the legal industry and its court reporter shortage.

For its part, Curry said the NCRA isn't against court reporters leveraging advanced technology. In fact, he predicts as AI's accuracy improves it will play a larger part in court reporters' work for the better.

"[AI will] double-check it with the audio and what I wrote and basically acts as a virtual scopist," he explained. "There's a place for it, but just the [electronic recording] by itself, it's extremely dangerous."