I recently spoke to my grandfather via CapTel mediated telephone conversation. CapTel is in ramp-up now, with main distribution only to veterans. Full-scale voice recognition and transcription is planned, but for now it’s you, your conversation partner and a silent third party transcriber.
Text scrolls along for the subscriber on a small LCD. The captioning was fairly good, and provided my grandfather the ability to hold a solid telephone conversation for the first time in many decades. He’s in his mid-80s and quite hearing impaired, age now conspiring with original damage from shelling during WWII. This is a work-around for his lost ability almost on par with the implanted optic lenses of some years back.
During the conversation I was quite conscious of the third person’s presence… questions ran through my head as we spoke:
- When tough conversations must be had, will people hold back from the truth and the straight line for fear of what the person listening might think?
- How often do people try to engage the transcriber as an active participant, perhaps to settle an argument?
- How often do transcribers themselves feel the urge to interject, to answer a question or make a statement? Does this urge subside with experience? Is this professionalism or apathy? How often do they feel an ethical dilemma in something they’ve overheard and must remain silent to? Can the transcriber be held liable in some instances, such as child endangerment?
- Are there already cases where someone has mis-transcribed conversation to devastating effect, ending relationships and destroying happiness? Or perhaps created misrepresentative text resulting in legal trouble for either of the conversing people? How long until waivers are required absolving CapTel of all responsibility?
- Are there times where the ability for someone to truly communicate has saved a life, created new happiness and joy?
- I wonder if transcribers send out the occasional “fuck you” on the screen to misogynists, racists, homophobes, zealots and other lowlifes then quit the job. Perhaps they take over one side of the conversation entirely, substituting their own thoughts to the deaf party. How often? On acceptance of the transcriptionist job do you sign an agreement affirming you will not do this? Are there legal penalties if you do?
- As a transcriber, could you bring suit for emotional distress against the person you were transcribing? Could you make a case for a hostile work environment?
- Are the conversations/transcriptions recorded to provide legal leverage for CapTel? Is this information for sale and searchable?
- How can someone do this for a job? Never mind potentially offensive conversations… I would go crazy transcribing all the banal blather flying across American phone circuits. Doughnut conversations in abundance. On the flip side, imagine the non-doughnut conversations to be heard. Are transcribers sometimes witness to amazing, wondrous interactions, changing their own viewpoint and their life? Is it possible first-hand experiences of this transcribing group will spill out to larger influence on society as a whole, promoting understanding and embracing of the spectrum of human life?
In the foreground, I participated in a wonderfully complete, transcontinental conversation with my grandfather. When I told him I loved him, I know he saw the words. In the background, when the conversation was over I felt the urge to thank our silent transcriber for their services, the culmination of all those questions above.
But I couldn’t. My grandfather/transcriber was already disconnected.
