January 30, 2008 by Rob La Gatta

Tom Goldstein of SCOTUSblog [LexBlog Q & A, part 1 of 2]

SCOTUSblog, which focuses on issues surrounding the United States Supreme Court, is one the most well-known law blogs around.  It's no surprise, then, that we feel privileged today to feature publisher Tom Goldstein in the hot seat for our LexBlog Q & A.

Tom, a Washington D.C.-based partner at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, has been running SCOTUSblog since 2003. In part 1 of the interview, below, he offers details on their innovative SCOTUSwiki. In part 2, to be published tomorrow, Tom gets more specific about the blog's reputation in the legal community and the personal challenges of blogging.

1. Rob La Gatta: Give me some background on SCOTUSwiki: what caused you to develop a wiki companion site to the blog? What are some of the goals you have for it?

Tom Goldstein: The idea for SCOTUSwiki was really a response to what I saw as a shortcoming in the nature of blogs. That is: they are fantastic for easily finding the newest, freshest information, but what happens when you want to see everything written on a particular case? Or find all of our statistics from past years? It’s kind of like the difference between a newspaper and an encyclopedia: a paper is great for up-to-the minute news, but isn’t as permanent or comprehensive as Brittanica.

After four years, we had thousands and thousands of posts with all this high-quality, unique content on our blog. For instance, we regularly write pieces about cases when they are granted, before and after oral arguments, and when the opinion comes out. We do regular statistical updates, and we feature noteworthy cert. petitions each week. We follow the Guantanamo Bay cases closer than anyone else, online or off. We have posted hundreds – or even thousands – of documents on our website that aren’t available anywhere else (save for very expensive legal databases). And so the thought was: how do we make this stuff easy to find, not just the day we write it, but whenever our readers need the information?

The answer was SCOTUSwiki. We chose a wiki because the software is infinitely expandable: we can instantly create pages for each new case, and we can create entire new areas of the site in a day, which we plan on doing in the future. It’s not a true wiki in the sense that anyone can edit it – we’re really concerned about objectivity and accuracy, so we don’t think it’s prudent to just let anyone out there change around the pages – but we definitely plan on expanding our coverage and trying some different things with it.

For now, though, it provides that permanence and comprehensiveness that a blog can’t really offer, and we’ve gotten good feedback for that.

2. Rob La Gatta: Currently, wikis seem fairly underrepresented in the blogosphere...yours is the first (and so far only) blog I've seen with one. Do you expect wiki sites to become more prominent on law blogs in the future? Why or why not?

Tom Goldstein: I don’t think so, for two reasons.

The first is that, unlike other blogs, we have a very defined subject area rather than any ideology: we just want to cover the Supreme Court. That’s the beginning and end of our mission: cover this one institution more thoroughly than anyone else, and do it objectively. That uniquely lends itself to building a wiki, because it’s such a direct mission and because we already have content that tries to be “encyclopedic” and objective.

For other law blogs that discuss the law in general, and from a more opinionated point-of-view, what would their wiki be about? How would it be focused and organized? Could people trust its objectivity? I’m not saying it’s not doable or that it wouldn’t be a valuable resource. But our site already has content that is basically encyclopedia-ready, and that’s a huge advantage.

Another reason it’s so hard is that a wiki takes a substantial amount of work to launch and maintain. Most law blogs have only professors or practicing lawyers as contributors. We have both of those that contribute, but we go beyond that and also have a full-time reporter as well as several staff members that spend much of their time and energy on the blog and the wiki. I can’t imagine how a site without such staff could build a useful, up-to-date wiki.

Interested in hearing more? Recent LexBlog Q & A posts:

Or, see our full list of legal blog interviews.

Tags: , , ,
January 29, 2008 by Rob La Gatta

Rick Klau of Feedburner/Google [LexBlog Q & A]

We're taking the LexBlog Q & A in a different direction this morning, putting our focus for today's interview less on the law and more on new media technologies (specifically, RSS). And who better to speak with on this matter than Rick Klau, a lawyer who formerly served as vice president of publisher services at FeedBurner?

Rick, who since FeedBurner's sale to Google has been a part of Google's content acquisition team, answered a few questions via e-mail last week about his views on RSS, the role the Internet has played on the 2008 presidential campaign trail and more.

1. Rob La Gatta: Do you remember when you were first exposed to RSS? What were your impressions of it at the time, and where did you expect it to go?

Rick Klau: I started a blog in December of 2001. Radio Userland (the product I used at the time) had an aggregator built in, and I started realizing that the ability to subscribe to sites I liked was fundamentally changing how I used the web. I was more consistently informed on subjects I cared about, and spent less time looking for information that mattered. Best of all, I was building relationships with people I hadn't met - based on the strength of their writing and our shared interests.

I don't think I gave it a lot of thought to try and actually predict where it would end up, but I do recall telling friends that RSS felt as significant to me as the browser felt when I first used Mosaic.

2. Rob La Gatta: In your opinion, has the world - and by that I mean the general, news-reading public - embraced RSS technology to the extent you would have expected when you started at FeedBurner?

Rick Klau: Absolutely.

Watching the growth curve of audience adoption was a very gratifying part of my time at FeedBurner. When I joined, aggregate subscribers to all the feeds we managed was measured in tens of thousands. Today that number is close to 100 million.

Perhaps best of all, many people who have "embraced" RSS have done so without really recognizing it. They just add headlines to iGoogle, or have their favorite blogs e-mailed to them, using FeedBurner's feed-to-e-mail service...they don't know that they're "using" RSS, and they shouldn't have to. (How many people using e-mail know that they're using SMTP or POP3? Not many, and that's how it should be.)

3. Rob La Gatta: What about the professional community: do you believe that businesses are utilizing RSS and blogging as much as they could/should be?

Rick Klau: There's always room for improvement. The last time I looked at a number of law firm websites, few were distributing information to clients via RSS. With the mass-market adoption of RSS and the ease with which firms can produce RSS feeds, they should see this as a simple way to embrace a convenient medium that gets them closer to their clients. Whether that's to distribute client alerts, podcasts (great for clients who commute!) or to summarize interesting and useful info found on the web, law firms can greatly increase their influence by embracing this medium.

4. Rob La Gatta: I saw you wrote about the Obama Facebook application, which is in many ways indicative of the way politics has taken on a new face for the digital age. How important do you see Internet-based tools in determining the outcome of the 2008 election?

Rick Klau: I'm not sure we're at the point where we can say conclusively that Internet-based tools are determining the outcome of the 2008 election. What they are doing is ensuring that more people can participate in the process - as volunteers, donors and even advisors. Savvy candidates are using the tools to more effectively organize their volunteers and leverage their input, which means that the tools are making the volunteers more effective.

Ultimately, the candidate still has to be able to sell people on their ideas. I was very involved in the Dean campaign, and watched as MeetUp and blogs emerged as tools that connected supporters offline as well as online. In this cycle, Facebook and even the campaign's own sites (my.barackobama.com is spectacular in this regard) are going further, giving me the ability to organize my precinct, recruit volunteers, and reach out to other voters by phone or by knocking on doors.

Back to your question - I don't think we want the technology to determine the outcome of the election. But if we can get more people involved and active in the process, we'll get the government we deserve. And that will be a good outcome all around. Particularly if Barack wins. :)

5. Rob La Gatta: Your blog is very personal. You have a disclaimer present, but some might still argue that you're walking a fine line (as we've all read about professionals whose personal blogs came back to bite them).

Do you have any concerns that being so personal out in the open could impact your professional reputation? Or do you think that developing a personality and a voice that people come to know - as you've done with your blog - is necessary for business professionals today?

Rick Klau: I've never worried that my blog would negatively impact my professional reputation, because what I write on the blog is what I say to friends, family members and co-workers. Writing on the blog is how I think, how I refine my opinions and how I challenge assumptions. I don't hide my personal opinions, but I also see the blog as a place to think out loud. It's not an outlet to take aim at others, and I don't think I've ever said something I'd be embarrassed by if a co-worker, competitor or friend were to read it.

Without any qualifications, the blog has had a dramatic, positive impact on my career. It's led directly to my last two jobs. Once I landed at Google, I met several senior people here who knew me because they'd read my blog in the past. It's produced speaking invitations at conferences as far away as Prague, resulted in inclusion in a number of high profile news publications, and opened doors with political campaigns where I've chosen to get involved. (It even got me a mention in Joe Trippi's book about the Dean campaign!) I've reconnected with classmates from high school, college and law school, and I've developed strong friendships with people I've never met personally - yet we exchange Christmas cards and chat frequently.

Do I have any concerns? Sure. I'm particularly sensitive to the fact that I'm now at Google, so I'm careful not to venture into territory where it might look like I'm speaking on behalf of Google. I stick to what I know, try to exercise common sense, and enjoy the process of writing about what I feel strongly about.

You talk about situations where a personal blog has come back to bite them - in most cases I've seen, that's been where the personal blog hasn't matched the professional appearance and it's caused embarrassment (or worse). My blog, as I mentioned above, *is* me. So far, it's working out pretty well.

Interested in hearing more? Recent LexBlog Q & A posts:

Or, see our full list of legal blog interviews.

Tags: , , , ,
January 28, 2008 by Rob La Gatta

Dan Harris of China Law Blog [LexBlog Q & A]

Sure, Seattle has a lot of bloggers - one recent study even suggested that 13% of folks here operate a blog. But of all the local content being produced through citizen journalism, the material written by international law attorney Dan Harris at the China Law Blog continues to turn heads.

It seems fitting, then, that we feature Dan for our LexBlog Q & A (an interview series that has by and large overlooked many of the Seattle-area bloggers). In an e-mail discussion last week, Dan answered some of our questions on the ins-and-outs of international blogging.

1. Rob La Gatta: Your firm focuses on general issues related to international law. What made you chose to start the blog with a specific focus on Chinese law?

Dan Harris: Great question. If we had infinite time, we would have done a Russian law blog and a Vietnamese law blog and a Korean law blog as well, but we don't. We also considered doing an international law blog, but we thought that would be too general.

We chose to focus on China because China is so hot, and because we have a lawyer in China (soon to be two) completely fluent in Chinese. So we were better positioned to ramp up our China work than any other. Also, the reality is that time spent seeking to generate China work gets us more work than time spent seeking to generate any other kind of work.

2. Rob La Gatta: It seems like your posts could be of value to a number of different groups: lawyers, businesspeople, the general public, etc on both sides of the Pacific. Who is the blog primarily geared towards? Does that have any impact on how you present the material and compose your posts?

Dan Harris: I write nearly all of the posts with our potential clients in mind. Our potential clients are, at least in my mind, really the same as our existing clients: for the most part, owners or CFOs or CEOs or, less often, in-house attorneys at small to mid-sized companies. These companies are usually American (including Canada), sometimes German or British or Russian, and interested in going into China or expanding within China.

I assume they have some familiarity with law, and most of them also have familiarity with going international in places other than China. I assume they are intelligent and, maybe most importantly, still willing to hire us even if they may disagree with our position on certain China issues. I also assume that this person does not particularly like lawyers and absolutely detests lawyer-speak. I write all posts to this hypothetical person.

3. Rob La Gatta: How many blogs do you read that are actually products of China?

Dan Harris: Very few. I cannot read Chinese characters, and so I am forced to read those that are in English...and those, for the most part, are not in well written English. My co-blogger, Steve Dickinson, can read Mandarin and he reads a number of Chinese blogs. My sense is that Chinese blogs are very much like American blogs.

4. Rob La Gatta: The recent murder of a Chinese blogger, supposedly by government officials, has gotten the Chinese blogging community riled up – so much so that their government cannot even restrict everything they're saying. Do you think this is indicative of technology's future role in guiding Chinese politics?

Dan Harris: Not sure I am the person to ask about this. There are certainly many people out there in the blogosphere – David Wolf, Rebecca McKinnon, Shaun Rein, & Sam Flemming immediately come to mind – who know far more about the Chinese Internet and blogging than I do. But my sense is that blogging is critically important to China's political maturation because its people look to the blogs for the truth even more than we do so in the U.S.

5. Rob La Gatta: Ultimately, what is it that keeps you blogging day in and day out?

Dan Harris: When I started, I did it to get business and I still do it to get business, but that is not what keeps me blogging day in and day out. Truth be told, we have so much business right now we can barely keep up. We have a new Chinese speaking lawyer who will start working for us out of Shanghai in May, and there are definitely days when I think about starting a countdown chart for that. We are also on the verge of bringing in a Seattle-based lawyer fluent in Chinese as well.

Yet I keep blogging, and the reason I do so is because I learn so much. I love that part about blogging. I like the learning, not in some sort of abstract sense but because it makes me a better lawyer...which, in the end, is what keeps the business flowing. I am typically the client contact on our China business, and though I will never know Chinese law as well as our lawyers who can read Mandarin, I do have to know it well enough to help clients in the initial stages of our representation before I hand over the rigorous part of the work to the real experts.

Interested in hearing more? Recent LexBlog Q & A posts:

Or, see our full list of legal blog interviews.

Tags: , , , ,
January 25, 2008 by Rob La Gatta

Daniel Schuman of the American Constitution Society [LexBlog Q & A]

The American Constitution Society for Law and Policy is a non-profit group that seeks to educate on Constitutional issues and their place in American law. One tool they use to spread that message is their ACSBlog, one of LexBlog's oldest - and most heavily trafficked - blogs.

The man behind ACSBlog is Daniel Schuman, our guest for today's LexBlog Q & A. Daniel, a 2006 graduate of Emory Law School, took over from Ian Millhiser as editor of the blog in the middle of last year.

1. Rob La Gatta: You joined the American Constitution Society as Assistant Director for Communications this past July. When you took over as blog editor, were there fairly strict guidelines in place as to how the blog should operate? Or were you given editorial controls to do with it what you please?

Daniel Schuman: When I started with ACS, I was fortunate to work with the blog's first editor, Ian Millhiser, who explained the blog's operation. ACS does not take positions on issues, and what we write reflects that neutrality, while still providing a variety of opinions. When we have guest authors, we make it clear that the article reflects the author's opinions, and we try to have guest bloggers with opinions that span the entire spectrum.

Beyond the neutrality requirement, I have had a free hand to experiment with the blog's format. We have added regular previews for upcoming Supreme Court cases, round-ups of the week's blog posts, YouTube videos from ACS events, summaries of reports and cases, and whatever else gives a sense of what is happening in the legal community.

2. Rob La Gatta: One of the things that attracts lawyers to the blogosphere is the power blogging has to create a strong network of friends who may never have even met each other in person. Has the American Constitution Society had similar results? Do you find yourselves entering into discussions with folks you wouldn’t have otherwise been in contact with?

Daniel Schuman: ACS has over 160 student chapters and nearly 30 lawyer chapters, so the formal organizational network alone is formidable. It is nearly impossible to travel to any part of the country without bumping into someone from ACS. I interact with a small segment of our formal and informal networks, through conversations about important legal issues and requests for experts to share their stories with our readers.

Because the blog provides analysis from across the progressive spectrum, I have the privilege of regularly discussing major legal issues with top practitioners. In addition, readers will often reach out to us with ideas and suggestions for articles. Writing the blog also gives me the excuse to write to other bloggers whose sites I enjoy.

3. Rob La Gatta: I’ve noticed that quite frequently, you feature guest posts authored by various legal specialists from around the country. What is the process that goes into securing guest bloggers (namely the planning & execution)? Do these folks come to you, or are you out actively soliciting for new voices?

Daniel Schuman: We actively search for new voices and welcome unsolicited contributions. The news cycle helps us determine what subjects we tackle and who we ask to write about them. It is a fair amount of work to secure a guest blog post, particularly in identifying someone who is knowledgeable and willing to write. Fortunately, ACS has many prominent members and supporters who are experts in a wide variety of fields and are also generous with their time.

4. Rob La Gatta: It seems like focusing on Constitutional issues opens a floodgate of potential material; way too much to cover it all. Who writes the non-guest blogger content for ACS Blog, and how do they decide what gets covered each day?

Daniel Schuman: I write most of the non-guest blogger content for ACS. The organization focuses on a number of discrete issue areas, and we keep an eye out for stories related to those areas. Even so, there is far more material than we can possibly cover, so judgment calls are necessary.

5. Rob La Gatta: When it started blogging, The American Constitution Society was taking a gamble by investing in a blog (still at that time a new medium). Do you think that in the next few years, more legal organizations will realize the potential benefits of entering the blogosphere?

Daniel Schuman: The technological side of running a blog isn't that complex anymore, although it is becoming more difficult to build a significant readership. More and more organizations are jumping into the arena. They have realized that, as long as they have something interesting to say, this is a cost-effective way of sharing the information.

According to Justia, there are over 2,300 law blogs. However, the biggest challenge and a sign of an organization's dedication to the exploration of ideas in a public forum is the ability to commit to sustaining a blog over a number of years.

ACS serves as a clearinghouse for ideas, which gives us a fairly unique role both in a policy and blogging context. Depending on the type of legal organization producing the blog, the experience is likely to be very different. Some organizations prefer not to wear their opinions on their sleeves; others have strong advocacy roles and proudly and easily pronounce them; still others have more subtle positions for which blogs are not the best medium.

As time goes on, some organizations will experiment successfully and maintain a frequent and active presence in the blogosphere, while others determine that their attention is better focused elsewhere.

Interested in hearing more? Recent LexBlog Q & A posts:

Or, see our full list of legal blog interviews.

Tags: , , , ,
January 24, 2008 by Rob La Gatta

Tim Titolo of the Brain & Spine Injury Law Blog [LexBlog Q & A]

Earlier this week, we got a chance to chat with Las Vegas-based brain & spine injury lawyer Tim Titolo, a LexBlog client who runs the Brain & Spine Injury Law Blog.

The result of that phone conversation is what you are about to read: our most recent LexBlog Q & A. During our discussion, Tim spoke of the value he sees in blogs, how he uses his blog at the conventions he attends, and more.

1. Rob La Gatta: Regarding your practice areas: what was it that first drew you to where the law and traumatic brain injury intersect?

Tim Titolo: Two things. One was that I just happened to get a case in the early ‘90s, and it was a brain injury case – a mild-to-moderate brain injury case. I worked it, and I worked it, and I worked it, and got a substantial verdict after a 6 week trial. That kind of said to me, “This is what you’re supposed to do, and if you keep doing it and you do it well, you’ll be successful at it.” So basically, brain injury found me.

The second reason was that [brain injury law] is something that is very specialized. And in the world as we know it, if you’re not going to specialize in something, you’re going to have more difficulties succeeding...that’s just a function of how the law profession – and life in general – has progressed in America.

2. Rob La Gatta: I notice you’ve authored posts mentioning the various conferences you’ve attended. Are people at these conferences, by and large, aware of your blog?

Tim Titolo: Well, I’ve only had my blog now for four or five months. But I will tell you that whenever I go to these conferences, I usually start it off with my blog page and then I switch it over to my web page, just to show [the audience] that I’m online and that they can contact me that way.

Are they coming to these conferences because of my blog? I wouldn’t say that they are…I think they’re coming because of who the sponsors are: the Brain Injury Association of America, the North American Brain Injury Society, those kind of groups.

3. Rob La Gatta: When you showcase your blog in these situations, do people show any interest that you're bringing a new medium in to your practice?

Tim Titolo: I’ve been doing this now fairly regularly, and what I’m finding is, when people find out you have a blog, they’re more like, “Well that’s interesting, you must really spend a lot of time on the area that you’re covering in your blog.” So I think people are impressed that I have the blog.

I think its kind of like if you were a football player, and you had a Heisman Trophy: people would just assume things about how well you do at football because you have that trophy. That’s what I do with my blog.

4. Rob La Gatta: What is the most personally rewarding element of blogging? What keeps you going at it each day?

Tim Titolo: There a couple of things that I like about the blog.

Number 1, it lets my clients know and reinforces for them that this is what I do, and that my interests are very specific to the injuries they’re suffering from (99% of my clients have a brain injury).

The other thing is, I like to write and I like to express myself. If I’m in the right mood – in the morning, over a cup of coffee – I enjoy reviewing information that I get over various feeds, and being able to forward those on with my own comments. I also do a little thing called Brainy Reviews, because I read a lot of books: if I read a book, and it has to do with brain injury, I’ll throw it on the blog. I just like to be able to do that.

Third, when I go to a conference – and I don’t know how appropriate this is or isn’t – you always get a list of the attendees and the faculty, with their email information. What I’ll typically do is add them to my subscriptions...after I send out a new post, there will be 5 or 6 that come back saying that they don’t want to be on the list anymore, and I’ll remove them. But in the meantime, I feel like I’m growing the knowledge of my blog by including more people in my subscriptions list.

5. Rob La Gatta: You’ve been doing this for a while now. What have you learned about the art of blogging that you wish you’d known getting started?

Tim Titolo: Well, in my particular situation, I was very intimidated to the point of almost wanting to give up. I would do a couple of posts and Stacey Merrick [LexBlog's director of client services] would write and give me constructive criticism. And I just felt like giving up, because it was so strenuous – I felt like was never going to be able to do this right.

The point is, I don’t think there is a "right" and "wrong" way to do a blog…you just do it. And then lo and behold, over the course of several weeks and months, if I’m talking to somebody, all of a sudden I’ll hear, “Thanks for sending me that stuff on your blog, that’s very interesting.” And I’m thinking, “Oh...I didn’t even realize that you were reading my blog.” But people come back and tell me that, and I appreciate it.

I would recommend for myself and for anyone else to get involved in some kind of a blog – whether its Kevin’s blog or something else – where new ideas are coming out as technology changes, and to not be afraid to do that (frankly I should do it more myself, I just haven’t). But I don’t want to just keep doing the same old postings all the time – I want to dress them up and make them better.

For instance, I got into the habit of posting a lot of pictures on my blog, and that looks a whole lot better than just text. But I’d like to do even more: okay, now there’s pictures, that’s good. But there’s probably more that I could do that I just haven’t done because I don’t have time to sit and figure it out. It’s got to be interesting for people that are looking at it.

Interested in hearing more? Recent LexBlog Q & A posts:

Or, see our full list of legal blog interviews.

Tags: , , ,
January 23, 2008 by Rob La Gatta

Eugene Volokh of The Volokh Conspiracy [LexBlog Q & A]

A mid-week LexBlog Q&A today features a special guest of notable prominence in the legal blogging community: Eugene Volokh, the UCLA School of Law professor who founded the successful blog The Volokh Conspiracy. He currently also blogs at The Huffington Post.

Though briefer than our usual posts, the e-mail interview below offers a glimpse into the mind of a man who has helped bring legal blogs to the mainstream.

1. Rob La Gatta: The Volokh Conspiracy now has almost 20 authors, making it one of the most heavily staffed legal blogs. Do you maintain some sort of editorial control over the other authors, or do you give them free reign to publish as they see fit?

Eugene Volokh: I give them free rein - it's easier for everyone.

2. Rob La Gatta: For a while now, you've been blogging over at the Huffington Post, which Kevin has described as a prime example of new media legal publishing. Do you believe that legal publishing will continue to evolve following a Huffington-like model, or will it take some other path?

Eugene Volokh: I'm not sure what "a Huffington-like model" is, and what exactly "legal publishing" is supposed to cover. But group blogs are a good model for readers who like a steady stream of interesting comments on a wide range of issues.

3. Rob La Gatta: The Wall Street Journal Law Blog has called you "one of the undisputed kings of the blawgosphere." At what point in your blogging career did you realize you had achieved such a prestigious title, and what do you think was the most important factor in getting you there?

Eugene Volokh: I can't say we merit the title, but I am happy that we've got a lot of readers, and tend to get a good many links. Why? My guess: We've been around for a long time; we have people who are expert on interesting topics; we post a good deal of stuff on those topics; and most of our posts are accessible and interesting to laypeople as well as lawyers.

4. Rob La Gatta: On top of all the other stuff you've got going on in your life, how do you find time to blog? Do you set aside a certain amount of time per week, or is it just whenever you've got a free minute?

Eugene Volokh: I blog whenever I have time plus the inclination. If I have enough of an inclination, I make time. I see blogging as part of my mission as a professor, much like other professors might see writing op-eds or newspaper columns as part of their mission. It's just that blogging is more flexible, more fun, and less scutwork than op-eds or columns.

5. Rob La Gatta: If you were to offer one important bit of blogging advice to a lawyer just starting his or her first blog, what would you tell them and why?

Eugene Volokh: Find something on which you are really expert, and which no-one else is covering. Then post frequently about it - enlist cobloggers if you need to - and when you write a post that you think some of the high-traffic bloggers (e.g., InstaPundit) might find interesting, e-mail them messages containing both the permalink to the post and the full text of the post, so they can quickly skim it and see whether it's worth linking to.

Interested in hearing more? Recent LexBlog Q & A posts:

Or, see our full list of legal blog interviews.

Tags: , , , ,
January 22, 2008 by Rob La Gatta

Dan Clement of the New York Divorce Report [LexBlog Q&A]

After a hiatus over the long weekend, the LexBlog Q&A returns on this Tuesday with an interview I've been holding onto for a few days. The latest guest in our hot seat is New York divorce & family lawyer Dan Clement, the man behind the New York Divorce Report.

I caught up with Dan when he had a few free minutes between court and the office last week to chat about his experience as a blogger in America's most populous city.

1. Rob La Gatta: When did you first start blogging? Since then, how have you seen the legal blogosphere change?

Dan Clement: I started blogging in July or August of last year, and in that time I’ve seen the number and diversity of legal blogs expanding. I can say in the area where I’m doing this – family/divorce law – I think there’s at least one [blog] for almost every state. I know a couple more just came alive in the past week or two. It seems to be mushrooming.

1a. Rob La Gatta: What about in terms of the overall writing quality you see demonstrated by other lawyers: has that improved?

Dan Clement: Yes, but I think that’s just the nature of the beast: as there’s more quantity, the quality also has to go up. If there isn’t a qualitative change, numbers alone don’t mean a whole lot. I think one just keeps feeding on the other: the more there are, the better they get.

2. Rob La Gatta: Aren’t there a lot of divorce lawyers in New York? How have you used the blog to distinguish yourself from the rest of the pack in your city?

Dan Clement: As far as I know, there’s only one or two other divorce blogs/family law blogs in New York, which I find a little shocking. As a result, I’m using the blog to try and differentiate myself from others. It has [also] allowed me to share some opinions that I have, or some judicial opinions that I think are noteworthy, which is reflected in my expertise/knowledge.

3. Rob La Gatta: In terms of community-building, many look to blogs as a networking tool. What about in a city like New York? Have you noticed that lawyers in NYC have used the legal blogosphere to foster relationships with one another that would have otherwise not been able to develop?

Dan Clement: I see that there is a blogging community when I read New York blogs, but I don’t think it’s just limited to New York. In general, there’s obviously a blogging community, where people are citing specific bloggers. Then, within jurisdictions, I think it gets even more – for lack of a better term – incestuous: certain blogs within New York State are repeatedly referenced in other blogs, particularly as it deals with the broader practice of law as opposed to the specialty areas. There are certain general blogs just covering New York law, New York practice of law, [and] the marketing of New York law...blogs which I see repeatedly referenced within other local blogs here.

4. Rob La Gatta: Based on your personal experience, what has been the biggest reward and biggest challenge to arise from blogging?

Dan Clement: For me, the challenge is always finding something to write about, and sometimes limiting myself on what I can write about. Some days I’ll find 4 or 5 topics that I want to write about, but there’s time to write about 1; then there are also days where I find it very difficult to come up with something interesting to write.

The biggest reward is when I start looking at statistics and I see that my readership is increasing, [and] I’m getting more hits on the blog. That means I’m reaching the people I want to reach, which brings me a bit of satisfaction.

5. Rob La Gatta: What about the art of blogging do you know now that you wish you knew when you first started?

Dan Clement: I think, early on, I was writing as if trying to write a masterpiece. Not that I don’t pay particular attention to my grammar now…but not every thought has to be an original thought. Sometimes it’s okay to say, “Hey, this guy came up with a good idea,” and give my spin on it, as opposed to saying, “I have to come up with something original.”

I think that was really daunting in the beginning: I was always trying to come up with an original article, as opposed to blogging by citing someone and talking about what they said, and giving my spin on it. Doing that was particularly draining, and it got tiring.

Interested in hearing more? Recent LexBlog Q & A posts:

Or, see our full list of legal blog interviews.

Tags: , , ,
January 18, 2008 by Rob La Gatta

Eric Goldman, professor at Santa Clara University School of Law [LexBlog Q & A, part 2 of 2]

It's Friday afternoon, and before the LexBlog Q & A takes its weekend recess, we've got to wrap up what we started yesterday: our interview with Santa Clara University School of Law professor Eric Goldman. (Before you continue, make sure to get up to speed by reading part 1).

Yesterday's post saw Eric talking about his initial exposure to blogs; today, the discussion wraps up with his take on how law professors view the blogosphere - and how they expect it to grow in the future.

1. Rob La Gatta: When speaking to other law professors around the country, have you gotten a sense of the general attitude toward blogs held by law profs? Do you think that, as is the case with lawyers, law professors are becoming more and more willing to venture into the blogosphere?

Eric Goldman: I think many law professors are aware of blogs now. Frankly, blogs are almost impossible to avoid in our community, especially blogs that discuss and gossip about the law professor business like Brian Leiter's Law School Reports, PrawfsBlawg, and Concurring Opinion. Given the prominence of these blogs catering to the specific informational needs of law professors, plus the rich content being generated by niche-y substantive legal blogs, I suspect that many professors now read at least one blog regularly.

Several hundred law professors are now affiliated as a co-blogger at one or more blogs, and I anticipate that number will continue to increase over time (but I'd be remiss if I didn't note the speculation that legal blogging has reached a plateau).

Eventually, in the next few years, it wouldn't surprise me if most law professors are affiliated with at least one blog, though many new bloggers will probably join existing blogs rather than start their own. I also expect blogging to follow a typical 80/20 rule, where 20% of the law professor bloggers will be responsible for 80% of the blogging. So many law professors will be bloggers in name only.

2. Rob La Gatta: Ultimately, where do you see blogs taking legal scholarship in the future? In 2008, what do you think will be some of the most significant developments to shape this medium, specifically with regards to legal publishing?

Eric Goldman: The law professor community is actively wrestling with (and perhaps obsessing over) these questions. At the most recent law professor annual conference (AALS in NYC), several panels broached this topic, and the topic arises perennially at that conference. Everyone wants to know the answer to these questions, but there do not appear to be easy and obvious answers.

Personally, I think blogs are an excellent complement to legal scholarship. As I mentioned, they expand our options to disseminate our ideas, and there are many bloggable ideas (what Eugene Volokh has labeled "micro-discoveries") that would not be worth publishing through other options.

I think the issue gets more complicated when discussing whether blogging can substitute for other types of scholarship. I could see blogging count as a partial substitute for some scholarship, but only a bit. In the end, I expect a law professor helping to shape the discourse will want to develop lengthy, complex and heavily sourced expositions for which blogging isn't the best communication choice.

From a technology standpoint, I think we are just at the beginning of exploring how to use online synchronous and asynchronous communications (using blogs or otherwise) to advance the scholarly dialogue. Some interesting early examples include:

I'm excited to see how else we as academics can engage each other in productive conversations using new technologies.

Interested in hearing more? Recent LexBlog Q & A posts:

Or, see our full list of legal blog interviews.

Tags: , ,
January 17, 2008 by Rob La Gatta

Eric Goldman, professor at Santa Clara University School of Law [LexBlog Q & A, part 1 of 2]

Another two part LexBlog Q & A begins today, as we offer up part one of our e-mail interview with Eric Goldman.

Eric is a professor at Santa Clara University School of Law who focuses his teachings on legal issues surrounding technology. He writes two blogs - Goldman's Observations Blog and the Tech & Marketing Blog - and is well-known among law professors around the country for his active role in the blogosphere.

1. Rob La Gatta: When did you first start blogging, and what prompted you to do so?

Eric Goldman: I started blogging about 3 years ago, in February 2005. In Fall 2004, two particularly net-savvy students in my Cyberlaw course repeatedly encouraged me to blog, and they promised to regularly read my blog. Thus, I figured I would start with 3 readers — these two students, plus my mom.

Ironically, I don't think my mom has ever read my blog, and I'm not sure if my two students (who have since graduated and become lawyers) still do. Fortunately, in the interim, I've added some new readers.

2. Rob La Gatta: How do you think you've grown, both professionally and personally, as a result of your experience monitoring, reading and writing blogs?

Eric Goldman: Blogging has changed my life in a number of ways.

First, it has forced me to efficiently organize my data in-flows, which has made me a better researcher and a more informed community member. Not only do I have a carefully selected roster of RSS feeds that I monitor constantly, but I have set up alert systems in various databases that help me identify important new developments. If it wasn't for blogging, I would not have taken these steps.

Second, I like writing, and blogging has given me an outlet for my works. I was always writing before blogging — I wrote op-eds, articles for bar journals, even consumer reviews at Epinions — but I never had a natural home for my written work until I launched my blog. Now, I can write whenever I want and publish my works without having to seek out a publisher.

Third, blogging has definitely elevated my profile, especially among journalists. I remember that when I first became a law professor, I rarely got reporter calls. So when there would be a new development in my area of expertise, I would sit in my office thinking, "Hey reporters, call me, I have brilliant thoughts about this!" But the phone rang only occasionally.

In 2005, when I launched my blog, my media appearances roughly tripled from 2004. In 2007, my media appearances roughly tripled from 2005, meaning I'm now getting about 9x the number of reporter calls I got in 2004. Spending this much time with reporters creates other challenges, but it’s a good problem to have.

Finally, I've made some fantastic friends through blogging. There's an inherent kinship among bloggers, so I immediately became part of a special club just by blogging. Further, I frequently cross paths (both physically and virtually) with like-minded bloggers, which has allowed me to befriend some really interesting and nice people.

3. Rob La Gatta: Do you believe blogs have played a positive role in how law professors teach and articulate their ideas? Can blogging have any serious impact on a law professor's reputation?

Eric Goldman: Blogs are one of many channels that law professors can use to communicate their ideas. This makes blogs a useful new publication option; they allow us to join (or start) a dialogue quickly and informally, and to establish ongoing communications with an audience of non-academic readers. But blogs aren’t our only option for publishing, and we always still have to decide the best dissemination medium for what we want to say.

Blogging definitely can affect law professors' reputations. Typically, it has a significant positive effect, but as with any publication, there is always a downside risk. Fortunately, the blogging community is pretty fault-tolerant; an occasional mistake or misstatement by an otherwise credible blogger will not be fatal to the blogger's reputation. Even so, I always remain keenly aware of the effect that blogging could have on my reputation, especially as a pre-tenure faculty member.

Interested in hearing more? Recent LexBlog Q & A posts:

Or, see our full list of legal blog interviews.

Tags: , ,
January 16, 2008 by Rob La Gatta

Tom Kane of Legal Marketing Blog [LexBlog Q & A]

Today, we return to the legal marketing realm with a LexBlog client who is specialist in the field: Tom Kane.

Tom, a former practicing attorney with 17 years marketing experience, currently runs Kane Consulting Inc. and publishes the Legal Marketing Blog. He is also the author of Letters for Lawyers: Essential Communications for Clients, Prospects, and Others.

1. Rob La Gatta: When exactly did you launch your Legal Marketing Blog, and what compelled you to take a gamble on what was previously considered a somewhat risky medium for legal professionals to get involved with?

Tom Kane: I began my blog on January 5, 2005.

As to why? You know, I don’t know. I heard about blogs as the up-and-coming thing, and then had several conversations with Kevin and decided to try it. I enjoy writing, but I didn’t know how much until I started writing my blog. It has energized me about other serious writing, which I have been thinking about for years.

2. Rob La Gatta: What do you think is the most important impact blogs have had on the legal marketing industry?

Tom Kane: There are so many legal marketing related blogs out there - some good, some not as good; some newsy and gossipy, others with helpful information like providing marketing tips, strategies, etc; ones that really try to be helpful vs. others that seem to be primarily sales pitches.

The point is that the plethora of legal marketing sites out there have been helpful in getting many law firms into marketing. Many small to medium size firms have traditionally been reluctant to get serious about law firm marketing, or if they were doing anything, it was minimal. Blogging has helped them identify consultants who can help them. That’s a good thing.

3. Rob La Gatta: In the middle of the holiday season, you wrote a blog entry titled "Work your network during the holidays." Do you believe that your professional network has grown through the use of your blog?

Tom Kane: Without a question. I have gotten to know better a number of other professional marketers, who I really didn’t know all that well or at all until I began blogging. There is one consultant up in the Mid-Atlantic who I have never met and who I think is very good. She has asked me for permission to use some of my stuff, and I have used hers. Links between marketing professionals has been fruitful in helping each other, I believe.

4. Rob La Gatta: For you, what has been the most rewarding result of blogging, and what was the biggest challenge you faced along the way?

Tom Kane: The publicity and comments I have received as a result my blog, and of course the calls that have resulted in new clients. The biggest challenge was finding the time to blog, and forcing myself to stay with it. It wasn’t easy at times, but definitely worth it.

I originally thought you needed to do a blog every other day. Then, I realized that over the weekend was a waste. Lawyers on a Monday are likely to have more important things on their plate than taking the time to read a blog either by RSS feed or by email, so I cut back, taking their time constraints into consideration. I went to 3 per week, and then two per week, which I think is enough after three years of blogging. I guess I have nearly 600 entries - mostly marketing tips - at this point, and I feel really good about that.

5. Rob La Gatta: If you were approached by a lawyer just about to start his or her first blog, what is the one most important bit of advice you'd offer them? Why?

Tom Kane: As Nike says, “Just Do It”...if you enjoy writing, it is fun and you can make a difference.

Oh yeah, and it really does lead to new work.

Interested in hearing more? Recent LexBlog Q & A posts:

Or, see our full list of legal blog interviews.

Tags: , , , ,
January 15, 2008 by Rob La Gatta

Shel Israel of Global Neighbourhoods [LexBlog Q & A]

Today's guest in the LexBlog hot seat is one of the blogosphere's most well-known faces: Shel Israel, who began his career as a reporter and has since established himself as a leading name in the technology industry.

In addition to speaking engagements and business advising, Shel co-wrote Naked Conversations with Robert Scoble in 2006 (the book recently celebrated its second birthday), and continues to operate a widely read blog called Global Neighbourhoods.

1. Rob La Gatta: I'm a journalism student, and there seems to be a disconnect between my peers (who are optimistic about the exciting future possibilities of the field), and our professors, who have a much bleaker outlook. As a journalist yourself, do you think current journalism students picked a bad time to enter the business?

Shel Israel: First, let's clarify what is strong and what is imperiled. I think the traditional media companies are going to have a great deal of problems so long as they remain loyal to paper distribution of products and one-way electronic broadcast. Quite simply, slicing and processing trees, smearing them with ink, putting them into plastic bags, then taking a fleet of fossil-burning vehicles to distribute them onto driveways, is inefficient and quite bad for the environment.

So, the companies that still do this are hurting financially, and they respond by cutting the numbers of journalists. In the U.S. from the year 2001 to 2003, I've read that there were 75,000 fewer reporting and editing jobs in traditional media. That looks quite bleak.

However, simultaneous to that, online journalism has flourished. There are more news gathering organizations online every day. Many are doing quite well economically. I would wager that the day will come quite soon when the New York Times makes greater revenue online than they do off. As the revenue grows, so will the number of paid journalists.

In any democracy, we need journalists, to watch and report on the rest of the institutions. That just isn't going to die. But there can be no individual freedom without economic freedom, and right now the number of paid journalistic positions in the U.S. is not growing fast enough.

I believe it soon will, and that the profession of journalist will be overwhelmingly online.

2. Rob La Gatta: Many companies, at least within the tech world, seem to operate corporate blogs that offer a degree of transparency to the company's operations. Is it reasonable to assume that eventually, operating a blog will be a pivotal tool for gaining the trust of the general public?

Shel Israel: I think that we are reaching the day when an enterprise-related blog is an everyday tool, just like e-mail or phone. When your generation replaces my generation, in a few short years in the marketplace and the workplace, blogs will simply be a normal tool of conversation - and among the best for scalable conversation.

But keep it in perspective. Companies are fundamentally about products and services. You can have great products and be a poor user of social media tools. Look at Apple and Google. Will this backfire on them? Maybe. Maybe not.

But for most companies, there is a need to get closer with customers: to understand what they like about you and what they like about your competitors, to get a sense of what they want you to do next. Social media is the most efficient way to do that so far.

3. Rob La Gatta: It seems like while a lot of professionals utilize new media, the general public is less quick to adapt. Is a mass embrace of these tools - newsfeed readers, for example - something that will inevitably occur over time? Or will we continue to see this technological divide until the old model is rendered obsolete and retired?

Shel Israel: I disagree with your premise. When you add up the number of people reading blogs, watching online video, [and] engaging in social networking, you probably have a number nearly equal to the number of people reading newspapers and watching TV.

For example, there are 125 downloads on YouTube for every New York Times newspaper sold. Until a couple of months ago, Facebook was growing by a million [users] a week.

I don't see a technological divide. I see a generational divide. Younger people are in the habit of using social media tools and most older people are not. As the younger people age and replace my generation, their habits will not change.

4. Rob La Gatta: You wrote last month that through the use of blogs, PR specialists have an opportunity to "have actual relationships with the public." Do you believe that traditional PR firms - those who care less about entering the conversation than they do about hyping up one side of it - will become a thing of the past?

Shel Israel: I think traditional practitioners can keep engaging in doing what they have always done and end up driving off into Jurassic Park, where they can hang out with the other fossils.

The trends are clear on what is happening. In terms of PR, the tipping point has passed. Those who see their jobs as engaging only traditional media understand that the traditional media, while still influential, is growing less so. They understand that the demographic is changing. I could have my numbers off a bit, but 30 years ago 70 million Americans watched network TV. The viewer's average age was 30. Now, 30 million watch network TV [and] the average age is 60. There is a vanishing point, and like objects in the rear view mirror, it is nearer than some might think.

5. Rob La Gatta: Forget for a moment all of the professional recognition you have received. What do you find to be the most personally rewarding aspect of blogging? As a blogger, what continues to drive you?

Shel Israel: If I were really famous, I would get a much better seat in fancy restaurants. I started blogging to get back in shape as a writer after having spent 25 years in PR. I figured if I were going to be broke, I might as well get back to what I love.

I asked four people to collaborate on a book with me; the fourth guy, Robert Scoble, felt he had something to say about corporate blogging. I began the project as a writer [and] I thought my next book would be on another topic.

But then I started talking to the people who were immersed in the blogosphere and I started to understand the magnitude of change involved. I evolved into an evangelist for the conversation over the monologue, and that turned out to have elements of the "power to the people" anthem we sang when I came of age in the 60s.

I blog now because I feel like I have something to say, and I am gratified because there seem to be some people who want to listen and then talk with me.

Interested in hearing more? Recent LexBlog Q & A posts:

Or, see our full list of legal blog interviews.

Tags: , , , ,
January 14, 2008 by Rob La Gatta

Cliff Mintz of Bio Insights Inc. [LexBlog Q & A]

To start off the new week, we've got an interview today with LexBlog client Cliff Mintz.

Cliff, a New Jersey-based management consultant who founded the biopharmaceutical placement & training firm BioInsights Inc., is an expert in his extremely specific field. At Cliff's Bio Job Blog, he has used that expertise to carve out a powerful niche in the blogosphere.

In our brief chat last week, Cliff described his blogging habits, the biopharmaceutical industry's presence on the web, and more.

1.Rob La Gatta: What compelled you to enter the blogosphere in the first place? Did you have a specific goal in mind, or was it just an interest in experiencing new media firsthand?

Cliff Mintz: I decided to do it because I recognized the potential for developing a platform for me to express what I was thinking about various topics, and also to promote myself [for] the possibility of getting involved in projects that otherwise would not come to me if I wasn’t out there on the web.

2.Rob La Gatta: Your blog is updated a lot. What compels you to continue posting so much new content? Do you set aside time for it, or do you just blog when you have a free minute?

Cliff Mintz: I do it because I’ve set personal goals for myself to try and build my brand - which is me. I know that content is king, and I know that in order to maintain my readership and grow my readership, I need to post things strategically that are consistent with my interests and consistent with [the] audience that I’ve cultivated.

I typically set aside at least an hour a day to blog, at least once or twice a day if I have the time. For example, today I just couldn’t do it, so I didn’t. But I check my stats all the time, and for the last week I’ve been running about 100 to 120 unique hits a day, whereas before the holidays I was running between 60 to 100. Something’s changed between then and now, where I’ve been able to increase my audience.

My goal is to try and do 1,000 unique hits a week, to get to - within a year - 5,000 unique hits a month, [keeping] in mind that once I get on the radar, there may be other [doors] that open for me, with regard to syndication or other opportunities.

3.Rob La Gatta: What’s the biggest reward, either personal or professional, that you’ve experienced as a result of blogging?

Cliff Mintz: Professionally, it gives me something to show people to show my work as a writer. Personally, I get to say what I want, uncensored (except that I have to censor myself from time to time).

It’s interesting to see that people will read what you have to say, and actually come back and read it again, and believe that what you’re saying is worthwhile. I guess both professionally and personally, it’s very rewarding to see that I’ve been able to [go] from essentially zero hits a day to up to over 100 a day. Which means that at least 100 people have stumbled across my blog...which I think is pretty cool, because I’m not a high profile guy.

4.Rob La Gatta: Is the bioscience industry well-represented in the blogosphere?

Cliff Mintz: There are a number of publications. The Wall Street Journal runs [their] Health Blog, and the [New Jersey] Star-Ledger runs something called Pharmalot. And there are various other blogs...if you look at my blogroll, its kind of representative of what’s out there.

There are a number of investment blogs that are related to bioscience, there are patent-business blogs about bioscience…it’s fairly well represented. But [not] with regard to what I’m trying to do. I’m trying to create a niche for myself within the scope of bioscience, and focus primarily on career development, jobs, layoffs, gossip that relates to employment, that kind of stuff. Everybody else writes about what’s going on in the world of biotech everyday. I can’t compete with the Wall Street Journal Health Blog...or Pharmalot, [which has] got a dedicated reporter who's worked at the Star Ledger for 10 years, reporting…that’s his job all day, to post stories. I don’t do that full-time; I just do it my spare time.

4a. Rob La Gatta: Do you think that it’ll grow, that more blogs similar to yours will pop up in coming years?

Cliff Mintz: I don’t know if more blogs like mine will come up, because I don’t think that there are many people out there that possess my skill set or knowledge of the industry. There are blogs that deal with the business side, blogs that deal with the science side, and then there are other blogs that are totally unrelated to bioscience that deal with recruitment, career development and stuff. [But] I’ve sort of identified a niche where I bring together the science, the scientists and the employment opportunities in one place.

I kind of view myself as the only place to go for scientists to really get an accurate picture of the types of jobs that they ought to be thinking about and where to go to get the jobs. I intentionally did that because nobody was in that space, and that’s sort of the space I evolved into personally.

5.Rob La Gatta: What do you know now about the art of blogging that you wish you’d known when you first started?

Cliff Mintz: I’ve learned:

  • that tagging is critical;
  • that controversy and inflammatory, gossipy stuff really gets people to your blog;
  • and that the flexibility of the platforms that are out there are not as flexible as I would like them to be. [...] I’m sure if you have an understanding of how to write code, you probably could get really innovative and creative. But I don’t know that, and that’s sort of been one of my limitations on the ability to grow my blog or expand my audience rapidly.

Interested in hearing more? Recent LexBlog Q & A posts:

Or, see our full list of legal blog interviews.

Tags: , , , , ,
January 11, 2008 by Rob La Gatta

Ed Poll of LawBiz Management [LexBlog Q & A]

The steady stream of LexBlog Q & A interviews continues on this Friday. Our end-of-week guest? LexBlog client Ed Poll.

Ed is a law firm management consultant who runs LawBiz Management and operates the company's LawBiz Blog. With 25 years practicing law and 14 years of consulting experience under his belt, Ed also writes for a series of legal publications, and has taught at universities including UCLA and University of Michigan.

1. Rob La Gatta: When was it that you started blogging, and what got you interested in it in the first place?

Ed Poll: I saw a number of folks blogging, and as a consultant I decided I needed to be at the forefront and understand the technology. Not that I needed to be at the leading edge, but I certainly had to be aware of it...and I had to be at a leading edge in order to be credible for my clients.

I [also] found a number of benefits from doing it, which were unintended consequences of my blogging. Sometimes I find it very creative, sometimes I find it a chore, and sometimes it’s so much of a chore that I don’t do it as often as I might. But Kevin seems to think I do it enough in order to maintain my status.

2. Rob La Gatta: Do you think that regulations imposed by state bar associations - such as the state bar of New York, which you wrote about in November - will ultimately become a thing of the past? Or should lawyers expect these to remain for the foreseeable future?

Ed Poll: That’s an interesting question, because it’s not just a question of blogging. The state bar associations like in New York or Florida or even Texas: the issue for them is not the blogging...the issue is what the blogging represents. For them, blogging represents not a [form of] communication by itself, but advertising. And they’re probably looking at blogging in a multi-faceted perspective. The [first facet] is advertising, which these particular bars seek to regulate. Whether that regulation is appropriate or not is a separate question; whether it violates a state’s decision or the Constitution is a separate question. But they seek to regulate advertising, and they see this as advertising.

The other [facet] is that they may look at this as communication to people who are not clients, and therefore there may be an attorney/client relationship created. And of course, that’s problematic from their perspective. There’s no engagement agreement, which is required; there’s no agreement to pay money, to exchange funds from one side to the other; and clearly, the question will arise in some instances whether there’s any malpractice being committed (for which the attorney/blogger is responsible). So I think there’s more than one avenue that causes the bar associations some concern.

3. Rob La Gatta: From a law firm management standpoint, what is the biggest reward you’ve seen from blogging?

Well, you have to understand that I’m not a practicing lawyer, so my perspective is a little different. I find it important to blog because it enables me to have a voice, and communicate to the legal community that believes my voice has some merit what my position is on a number of issues. [...] It gives me an opportunity to have a voice and, hopefully as a consequence, some influence. It also forces me to pay attention and be more informed [and] more intelligent on the issues, whether I blog about them or not. It keeps me current with what’s happening in the legal community.

[Also], a number of my posts are good enough that we can take either the entire post or the idea and use it for an article that gets published in one or more of several places: my electronic newsletter, LawBiz Tips, or a weekly column that I write for Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly, or one of several publications that I write an article for on a monthly basis. Then, ultimately - if we can put together enough good posts and enough good ideas - that may work itself out to be either a special report, a book or something of interest to a prospective client.

4. Rob La Gatta: What do you think is in store for the legal blogosphere in 2008…got any predictions?

Ed Poll: I don’t see blogs going away, no matter how hard the bar associations seek to regulate it. When you’ve got the ABA Journal listing [their] top 100 blogs - one of which is ours, I’m pleased to say - that gives it an aura of respectability and credibility.

[It's] like with the Internet…how do you regulate the Internet? I mean, a number of people have tried, but nobody’s succeeded.

Yesterday, Dr. Phil on television had a congressman who had introduced legislation to regulate YouTube and MySpace postings. [Phil] had the mother of a kid who committed suicide because of what he was calling “cyber bullying,” and then he had a First Amendment lawyer, on this panel of three people. The lawyer said, "You’ve got to be careful, because you’re getting into free speech. That’s a right…that’s not a privilege. And so you’ve got to be careful how you draw the legislation."

I think that’s what happened with the state bar, when it tried to regulate blogs as advertising. You’ve got to draw those lines very narrowly. So in 2008, I don’t see it going away...I see it only expanding. And the more people talk about the benefits that come to them for practice development as result of a blog, the more others are going to get into it.

5. Rob La Gatta: If you were to offer one bit of advice to a lawyer just starting his or her first blog, what would it be and why?

Ed Poll: A couple of things.

One, get professional help. I don’t think that this is a hobby; I think that this is part of your business, and as such, you ought not to do the mechanics of creating the blog. Yes, you could do it. But this is not like gardening in the back yard - this is professional; you guys [at LexBlog] are skilled at it, [and] there are others that are skilled at it. Business it is, and you ought to work with somebody whose business it is to start [your blog].

I suppose I could go on and create a website, but that’s not something I’m going to do. I’m not a computer techie [or] a webmaster, and that’s not where I want to spend my time…I want to spend my time doing what I do best, which is what nobody else can do. In my case, it happens to be coaching and consulting. Everything else can - and should be, in my opinion - handled by somebody else.

The second thing I would say is don’t go into it unless you’re serious. Again, this is a business. It’s not a hobby. I would not encourage, as I know some people do, to post personal thoughts or a journal of your travels across the universe. If you want to do a personal journal and you send it to your friends, that’s fine. But that’s not what blogging in our context of this conversation is all about.

I [also] think you have to be prepared to go in there and blog once or twice a week, or at least on a regular basis, so that people begin to look for your commentary [and] so you begin to establish your credibility. There’s one blog - I think it's SCOTUSblog - where the guy goes in and talks about U.S. Supreme Court decisions. In one case, so I’m told, he posted a review of a Supreme Court decision the morning it came out, and he highlighted the fact that the opinion writer made an error in one of the footnotes. The error was caught that day as a result of his blog post and corrected. That’s power. And that’s what you want to look for.

So again, unless you’re serious about this, I would suggest that you save your time and you save your money and do something else more productive for yourself.

Interested in hearing more? Recent LexBlog Q & A posts:

Or, see our full list of legal blog interviews.

Tags: , , , ,
January 10, 2008 by Rob La Gatta

Carolyn Elefant of MyShingle [LexBlog Q & A]

For a recent interview, we spoke with lawyer/blogger Robert Ambrogi, who - among other things - makes up half of the ALM Law.com Blog Network's Legal Blog Watch. Today's LexBlog Q & A features the other half of that blog partnership: Carolyn Elefant.

Carolyn, who wil