Relax--it's realtime

Okay, yesterday I forced myself to not write verbatim.  It was tough to lay off the repeated words (and the dashes that go with them), to lay off the false starts, to lay off the extra fumbling words and make it a smooth Q and A.  I also forced myself to not try to write in the interruptions of "okay," "uh-huh," et cetera, and also, if one person started talking and I would normally try to get it somewhat close to order spoken, I made myself write them as a whole: the whole Q, the whole A.  I also just got bare bones for colloquy.  "Objection to the form of the question" became "object, form" and even "form."  You know what?  It made it SO MUCH EASIER.  I was not exhausted.  And if someone interrupted someone else, I didn't care--just dashed 'em out of there and didn't look back (whoever I heard more clearly was whoever ended up on the record (and maybe whoever was easiest to write) and didn't get flustered and resisted urge to tell them one at a time or that I didn't get someone on the record--I resigned myself to it is what it is and that they'd have a complete record of all that had been said if they'd done their job right).  

I am thinking I may be on to something with this mind reset, and that is: when writing realtime, don't waste an ounce of energy on the inconsequential.  It's hard not to write all that stuff, all the punctuation, all the repeated words, the false starts.  It helped my writing to write the meat, helped my stamina--and it was much easier on my body.  I think if I can retrain myself to not write verbatim, there's real potential.

Views: 700

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Amanda Leigh on April 28, 2013 at 11:17

"(2) probably have a 12-step procedure for using the bathroom that includes rubber gloves, several paper bags, use of hand sanitizer between each step."  LMAO!!

That's good to know--and a good way to think about it.  All counsel I have ever written realtime for were very respectful of the -- well, there was that one, the last one, that made me feel like I was the scum of the earth with his irritated look at the screen if it didn't come up absolutely perfect--that was the last time I even wrote realtime for pay.  I was, like, screw this.  It probably would have been much better had I not sweated every utterance--I even tried to finger-stroke half words.  Pffft!! /(  One guy looked at the screen and then looked at me with shock and amazement that I got this difficult answer by an emotional witness--that, of course, threw me into f*ck-up mode (lol).

I know what you mean about attorneys looking quizzical--I've gotten that whenever I have broached the subject of their opinions re a reporter padding the record.  When I have expressed how some really worry about it--even the appearance of it--they react as if that is silly, as if it would matter in the least.  That helped me decide: don't worry about it.

Permalink Reply by mary nelson on April 28, 2013 at 11:34

Tell us how you really feel, Mary Ann! LOL!  I agree we tie ourselves in knots getting that crap which serves no one and causes excess intakes of alcohol at the end of our day.  But do we really have a choice when it's videotaped?   I'm just asking.   I know Mike Miller says to leave a lot of it out, even in videos. 

 

Permalink Reply by Kelli Combs (admin) on April 28, 2013 at 11:48

I may leave out a few porky pig (as Janet calls it) stutters, but most everything goes back in when videotaped.   I know it may not matter, but I don't want to leave any room for anyone coming back to me and complaining the transcript didn't sync up.  I know that's happened to other reporters because I've heard about it.  Now, maybe these reporters left out a ton of stuff.  Not sure on that part.

Permalink Reply by Amanda Leigh on April 28, 2013 at 11:54

Probably what has happened has absolutely nothing to do with syncing.  What gives them the most trouble in syncing would be us not putting ourselves in the record, verbatim, swearing in the witness.  Now, that's a chunk.  My guess is some hourly is hired to look over transcript with audio and they find things missing.  "Won't sync!"  Yeah.  Right.   

Permalink Reply by Marge Teilhaber (TILE hobber) on April 30, 2013 at 15:22

I had that experience once and I didn't leave out a ton of stuff by any means.  It was just barely audible BS.   This one agency went through it with an anal/fine-tooth comb and had me add lots of garbage in.  So I'm pretty much not taking any chances and put most BS in when it's video.  I'm charging more per page per party so it's not as if I'm doing it for free.

Permalink Reply by Janet on April 30, 2013 at 17:51

That's -- that's - that's all, folks. 

I hate putting that in transcripts.  Do I?  Yes.  But I hate it.

Permalink Reply by Amanda Leigh on April 30, 2013 at 14:37

I am scoping this job I did purposefully nonverbatim.  I am not putting all the stutters and you knows, okays, all rights, uh-huhs, false starts, et cetera, in the transcript.  It reads beautifully, and it is much easier to proofread.  Ah, the winds of change.

Permalink Reply by Kelli Combs (admin) on April 30, 2013 at 18:27

I hope that job is not videotaped.  If it's not, go for it.  If it is, you better be careful......

Permalink Reply by Amanda Leigh on April 30, 2013 at 19:16

Yeah, not videotaped.  Don't have the kahunas.  I have heard of a reporter in south Texas that really cleans up everyone--doesn't mess with any repeated words, no sloppy structure, just makes the transcript a work of art (this was 20 years ago--probably retired by now).  The person who told me about this guy said, "Even on video!!"  I was shocked.  I never forgot that, though.  Bet nothing ever came from it and his life was a lot easier.  And I have heard it from countless videographers, that the transcripts they've seen didn't come close.

I will tell you that MANY times I have gotten transcripts from reporters that aren't even close to verbatim, from what I view on the video.  When those transcripts come in, I've given up being too concerned about verbatim, just so long as it's the little stuff missing--I just want the right homonyms and a modicum of punctuation skill.  Know what I mean?

Permalink Reply by Kelli Combs (admin) on April 30, 2013 at 19:41

Hmmmm.  Very interesting.  You may be on to something there, Ms. Amanda!

Permalink Reply by mary nelson on April 30, 2013 at 19:52

    It's gotten to the point where the CR firms control us (we're the ones with the license) and we are pleasing them instead of the lawyers.  I can't believe most lawyers want all that slop in the transcript.  We make our life harder and maybe are not serving the attys.  The point is where do you draw the line?  I put it all in in video jobs, and the little more we get paid doesn't cover it.

 

 

Permalink Reply by Amanda Leigh on April 30, 2013 at 20:04

I've always just done it--but I think you're right, Mary; I don't think they want all of that in there.  I always said I would fall back on my 5% rule (that I only tested at 95% accuracy), but don't tempt fate.  I have never had an agency tell me to put anything in (and I'd probably go Bad Uba on 'em if they tried), but that is probably because I am way micro on video deps anyway.  This has been so nice on this one that I did nonverbatim.  It was a breeze to write and a breeze to scope and read--and it's so pretty (lol). 

RSS

© 2024   Created by Kelli Combs (admin).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service