Automatic speech recognition is useful for low-risk drafts, but it is not automatically the right processor for every recording. Sensitive interviews and multi-speaker discussions need a decision based on purpose, accuracy and data protection.
Context changes the result
A person can use the surrounding discussion to distinguish names, technical terms and words obscured by accent or sound quality. They can follow a project-specific speaker key and flag uncertainty instead of silently replacing it with a plausible phrase.
Confidentiality must cover the whole workflow
Ask where audio is uploaded, whether a provider retains or trains on it, who can access it and how deletion is verified. Consumer tools may use contractual terms unsuitable for special-category research, legal or healthcare material.
Consistency across a dataset
A named manager, shared style guide and controlled transcriber panel help large projects apply the same editing, anonymisation and formatting decisions across every file. That consistency supports later coding and review.
The correct approach can still include approved technology, but accountability and final quality should remain with competent people.