The ATA Chronicle - January/February 2020 - 36

THE ENTREPRENEURIAL LINGUIST

BY JUDY JENNER

Is Remote Simultaneous Interpreting the Next Big Thing?

ust like many interpreters and
translators, I've been thinking
about the future quite a bit. Not
just about the future of our profession,
but the future of work in general and
about where we, as practicing linguists,
can find our long-term place in a
world already dominated by artificial
intelligence and amidst the threat
(and perhaps opportunity) of machine
translation. An area I find particularly
interesting is remote simultaneous
interpreting (RSI). It's an area I
believe offers great opportunities for
interpreters in the years to come, and
we will have to work out exactly how it
will, well, work. Allow me to elaborate.
As a seasoned court and conference
interpreter, I travel a lot, and while
some of it is enjoyable, some of it can
be a drag, keeps me away from home,
and is bad for the environment, as I
usually have no alternative to air travel.
Oftentimes, I find myself wondering if
it's necessary to fly 1,000 miles roundtrip for an hour-long court hearing.
Could this be done remotely? What
about conferences?
The answer is, yes, it can be done,
and the technology is certainly available
and quite robust. What remains to
be seen is whether or not RSI will
be widely adopted. I've tested many
platforms and find several of them
to be excellent, with Voiceboxer,
based in Denmark, being my current
favorite. This Scandinavian company
has designed a platform that's elegant,
simple to use, works beautifully,
and offers great customer service. As
RSI is gaining more traction, major
interpreting industry players such as the
International Association of Conference
Interpreters have published their
position papers on remote interpreting,
and I've enjoyed reading about the
direction of this new technology and
what still remains to be done. Here are
some of my thoughts:

about teaming up with me to do RSI
have politely declined, and I don't
blame them. Some just don't want the
uncertainty of not having tech support
by their side, don't want to learn how
to use RSI platforms, or are simply
uncomfortable with new technologies,
all of which are legitimate reasons.
However, as RSI gains in popularity,
this would mean that they would be
excluding themselves from a relatively
significant part of the interpreting
market. I see e-sports (yes, video
games) as particularly well suited
for RSI.

I think it's important that
interpreters and technology
providers have a nuanced
conversation about what we each
need to be successful.

Some Interpreters Won't Like RSI:
While change is good, it can also
be hard, and in my experience RSI
is more challenging than in-person
interpreting because you have the
added layer and potential challenge of
technology. (I've had a lot of things go
wrong, but have also had many very
smooth RSI days.) Ideally, RSI would
be provided in a real interpreting
hub, in an actual interpreting booth,
with your interpreting partner by
your side and onsite tech support (the
event audio and video would come
to you remotely). However, the vast
majority of assignments I've done have
been from my home office (there's
controversy about whether this should
be done at all) with my booth partner
in a different city or country. Some of
the best interpreters I've approached

Working Conditions Are Key: Just
because your work is done remotely
doesn't mean our working conditions
should suffer. These conditions should
stay the same, or perhaps we should
even take the opportunity to improve
them. For instance, we still need to
insist on minimum fees, even if the
event is short, as we bill for our time,
which should be compensated the
same whether we provide the service
remotely or in person. We also need
to push to guarantee availability of
tech personnel to troubleshoot, ensure
we get the breaks and audio quality
we need to not damage our hearing
("just turn it up louder" is not a viable
solution), and need to discuss who is
responsible in case of technical issues,
among many other topics. There is
much left to be figured out, and now
is the time to demand what we need.
I recently turned down an assignment
because the client only wanted to pay
for an hour when that one hour was
blocking the entire morning slot. You
need time to test and be ready at least
30 minutes ahead of time, just like
you would in a traditional conference
interpreting setting. I insisted on the
minimum fee of three hours and didn't
get the assignment, but hope I did
some client education along the way.

This column is not intended to constitute legal, financial, or other business advice. Each individual or company should make its own independent business decisions and consult its own legal, financial, or
other advisors as appropriate. The views expressed here are not necessarily those of ATA or its Board of Directors. Ideas and questions should be directed to judy.jenner@entrepreneuriallinguist.com.

The ATA Chronicle | January/February 2020

www.atanet.org

http://www.atanet.org

The ATA Chronicle - January/February 2020

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of The ATA Chronicle - January/February 2020