Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
why do we need real time stenographic transcribers/court reporters?
What's wrong with recording the proceeding and then paying people minimum wage to transcribe and double check them?
Are there any rules against audio recording? What can a transcriber possibly do that audio recording cannot? how can reading transcripts EVER be better than listening to the recording itself?
for any person who says "audio equipment can be flawed" how is a person any better at it?
2 Answers
- Conor FLv 69 years agoFavorite Answer
Audio equipment is open to interpretation and is subject to quality concerns. If a person mumbles, is heavily accented, or other matters, the audio tape may not be able to accuratly recapture what was said.
A stenographer however is highly trained not only in how to operate their machinery (which functions off of phonetics rather than alphabet), but also as a listener to pierce through those things.
Even in this modern age, we still have audio recordings that can be completly inaudible. There can also be disagreements between the attorneys or the jury as to what was said.
Having a stenographer, who has no vote in the trial, is the objective authority as to what was said. Judge, Jury, and Attorneys, and witnesses must all accept what was recorded by the stenographer.
- Anonymous9 years ago
U r right.
This can be tried for a change and see how it works.