April 25, 2008 by Rob La Gatta

Bill Pollak, CEO of ALM [LexBlog Q & A]

Hot on the heels of yesterday's LexBlog Q & A with Mario Sundar of LinkedIn (which focused less on the law and more on social networking), we're shifting gears back to the legal realm. And who better to bring us back in style than Bill Pollak of ALM?

Bill, who has been with the company since it's formation and currently serves as their CEO, brings a unique understanding of legal publishing to the table. In our e-mail exchange, he offers his perspectives on the current state of legal publishing, the ALM's use of technology at their website, and how he thinks ALM will fare in a world where traditional publications are continuing to fall by the wayside. See the full text in it's usual location (after the jump).

1. Rob La Gatta: When you started with ALM (at a time the Internet was still quite young), did you ever imagine the web would have had as profound an impact on your business as it has thus far?

William Pollak: All of my 1998 assumptions about the web have turned out to be wrong. Of course we all knew that we were witnessing the start of a new medium, and that certain parts of our predominantly print franchises would be jeopardized by the web. But the idea of user-generated content in all its many forms, and the revolution that that would bring to the dissemination of information, was far from being on my radar 10 years ago.

The idea that we newspaper and magazine publishers would originate our content electronically before or instead of putting it into our print publications was also not foreseen by most of us. And the idea that this new medium would not only eat into our historical revenue base but also open up dramatic new opportunities—things like webinars and new kinds of directories and blog networks—well, we didn’t see those coming 10 years ago either.

That being said, I should say that I’m also amazed at how little the web has impacted other parts of our business. For instance, powerful print brands remain powerful even in the electronic world, and have not really been supplanted by web upstarts. And law firms, by and large, continue to market themselves in much the same way as they have always marketed themselves.

Individual lawyers may have launched blogs and other initiatives to market their own expertise, but few firms have figured out how to use the web to extend their brands, generate leads and build their businesses. And, to give a third example, information may be more available for free via Google and the web than ever before, but West and Lexis remain healthy and vibrant businesses, just as they were 10 years ago. So we need to be careful not to overstate the impact of this admittedly powerful medium.

2. Rob La Gatta: Can you provide some insight on when ALM decided to begin incorporating RSS feeds onto Law.com, and what prompted this addition? Any information about the number of subscribers?

William Pollak: We began to incorporate RSS feeds around 5 years ago, as we learned the value of pushing our content out to other websites and RSS readers. Although we have no good measure of the number of RSS subscribers, or the traffic they generate back to our sites, our sense is that they have become an important source of traffic for us.

3. Rob La Gatta: What must a blogger do to get their blog included in your Blog Network?

William Pollak: Blogs are selected for our Blog Network in much the same way that outside columnists are chosen for our newspapers.

We look, first and foremost, at the quality of what’s being posted, the frequency and seriousness with which the blogger seems to take their blog, and our judgment of the value being potentially provided to our readers. Given our current list of blogs, we look for new offerings which will fill niches and add to our overall coverage. Right now we are particularly focused on finding blogs which cover the international business and practice of law, for example. And, of course, we look at the traffic which a new blog would likely bring to our network and to our advertisers—generally speaking, more traffic is better than less.

4. Rob La Gatta: What do you think is in store for ALM's print publications, in a time so when many newspapers and magazines are fading away? Is ALM is equipped to weather the storm?

William Pollak: Our newspapers are thriving and, I suspect, will continue to do well in the years to come. We are in the process of reinventing what a legal newspaper should be, and increasingly recognize that they are less about “news” and have become much more important for the court and legal information which they provide. We continue to gather and publish, both in print and online, a wide array of decisions, decision summaries, verdicts, court rules, calendars and the like. And many readers tell us that print is still their preferred means of receiving that information even while more and more of it becomes available from us online.

Magazines are somewhat more challenged, since most lack the element of “must have” information that one finds in a legal newspaper. I believe our magazines need to do much more to build their brands online, and turn themselves from monthly providers of feature stories and surveys into daily providers of community news and information. That will not be an easy transition, but I think we are strong enough to see it through.

As you may know, ALM was acquired last summer by Incisive Media in London. Through that acquisition, we have gained access to dramatically improved web technology and a team of experienced business-to-business publishers who are well-ahead of us in their transition to online publishing. As we now upgrade to new content management tools and other capabilities, I think you will see that ALM has the resources needed to succeed in the electronic age.

5. Rob La Gatta: In your eyes, what has been the most valuable impact the Internet has had upon the legal profession so far, and why?

William Pollak: The biggest impact of the web in the publishing industry has been to level the field separating journalists from readers.

In the pre-web era the paradigm was simple—editors figured out what was important, presented it to the reader, and the reader took it in. Now, there is much more back-and-forth, and much more user participation in the process of news gathering and analysis. Journalists may still be subject-matter experts on various topics, and their voice may be one which readers still want to hear. But the journalist now has to listen and react to users in a more direct way, and can no longer assume that their word will be the last heard on a given topic.

That’s an important and, I think, welcome change. It expands dramatically the amount of content available to include in—or link to—a given story. And I think it has the potential to build a much tighter bond between publishers and readers.

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

Or, see our full list of legal blog interviews.
Tags: , , , ,
April 24, 2008 by Rob La Gatta

Mario Sundar of LinkedIn [LexBlog Q & A]

Unlike most working folks in the professional world, Mario Sundar can legitimately say that a LinkedIn profile is all he needs to highlight his professional experience. After all, what good is a static website bio page when you're employed by a company that has grown through its ability to render such traditional methods of showcasing expertise obsolete?

As community evangelist for LinkedIn and editor of the LinkedIn blog, Mario - who also writes Marketing Nirvana, a blog covering marketing and social networking - spoke to us in an official capacity, commenting on how LinkedIn uses their official blog to communicate with users and where some the site's more recent features (groups, etc.) may ultimately become. See the full text after the jump.

1. Rob La Gatta: Why did you start the LinkedIn Blog?

Mario Sundar: The LinkedIn Blog was started with the desire to provide an easy access to LinkedIn users where they could turn to, either with a question, comment or feedback. If I could enumerate the reasons we had on top-of-mind when we started the blog, it was to:
  • Be the source of information on all things related to LinkedIn, whether it be new features or tips-and-tricks to get the most out of LinkedIn
  • Be a point-of-contact with our users when they had questions related to [the] product or otherwise
  • Proactively initiate the conversation on professional networking with the millions of LinkedIn users (currently 21 million and counting...)
  • Maintain that conversation via active participation through comments on both our blog as well as other blogs out there
  • Educate users on how to best use LinkedIn (Best Practices, Tips-and-Tricks, How other professionals are using LinkedIn, etc...)
  • Take user feedback to our internal teams (product, engineering, design, etc...)
2. Rob La Gatta: Do you see any value in someday having members of the LinkedIn management team writing for the blog? Do any of them blog already?

Mario Sundar: Absolutely. The role of the blog is to break down the barrier that sometimes exist between internal teams of an organization and the users of a product/service. As Hugh Macleod of Gaping Void succinctly puts it, it’s about making more porous the membrane that exists between the two.

We’ve had our CEO, Dan Nye, respond to user feedback on earlier blog posts (via NYT blog). We’ve also had our VP of Product Strategy and co-founder Allen Blue, blog in the past. Moving forward, I hope to bring other members of the team to either blog or respond to user comments. Also, I’m really glad that we’ve had almost 40 colleagues of mine (from product, engineering and design) contribute on our blog already. That’s like 18% of the workforce [that] has already blogged on the LinkedIn blog.

3. Rob La Gatta: What type of response has the blog generated from users? Have any changes to the site's UI come directly from feedback posted in comments at the blog?

Mario Sundar: The blog definitely has a very healthy involvement from the users with an average of 9 comments/post. Of course, some product posts receive almost 75 comments, so it widely varies with each post (as is expected). We’ve had everything from kudos to product feedback on the blog, and I make it a point to reroute that feedback to the right individuals.

Changes do happen via user feedback: most recently, we introduced RSS updates for Network Updates, which had been asked by users in the past. And, as I said, I definitely make it a point to take an aggregation of user feedback to product/engineering, teams etc...

4. Rob La Gatta: We started a Legal Blogging group and saw it take off almost overnight. Have you seen similar results with other groups? Ideally, what purpose would LinkedIn Groups serve?

Mario Sundar: LinkedIn Groups is, in my opinion, a dark-horse feature...and one of my personal favorites. Since we made it easier to start and maintain groups on LinkedIn, we’ve seen it take off in a big way. Currently, groups not only help you stay in touch with like minded professionals, but also connect with them directly (which is something you cannot do as a free member).

You also have the opportunity to attach a badge, whereby your professional preferences can virally spread through your network updates. Moving forward, the product team is working on helping you get more out of groups. Stay tuned to the LinkedIn Blog for news on that as and when it happens.

5. Rob La Gatta: How personalized do you ultimately see profiles becoming? Do you see any possibility for a time when bloggers can have a feed for their blog built in, syndicating their latest posts directly to their profile?

Mario Sundar: We currently don’t have plans to offer that functionality.

As a blogger myself, I do link to my 2 blogs on my LinkedIn Profile, and I also try to update my LinkedIn Status with my latest blog post.

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

Or, see our full list of legal blog interviews.
Tags: , , ,
April 17, 2008 by Rob La Gatta

Kevin Livingston & Dennis Pfaff, editorial team at Thelen's Climate Law Update [LexBlog Q & A]

As far as legal blogs go, the Climate Law Update – an energy law blog produced by Thelen Reid Brown Raysman & Steiner – is particularly unique.

Rather than simply relying on attorney commentary or marketing speech, the blog is nothing short of legitimate reporting: its editorial team is comprised of two San Francisco-based professional journalists (reporter Dennis Pfaff and editor Kevin Livingston, who together bring more than 40 years of journalism experience to the table) researching stories and offering news similar to that published by traditional news sources.

Climate Law Update is an interesting glimpse at the shape legal reporting could ultimately take...and is a great example of how a large firm can use new media to their advantage. "We are both veteran journalists," says Livingston, "so it is unique that we think this is one of the coolest things we have been involved in." See our interview with both Livingston and Pfaff, which covers these issues and more, after the jump.

1. Rob La Gatta: How did the idea to get this blog off the ground come about?

Kevin Livingston: I was already here at Thelen as the national manager of public relations, and Dennis was an environmental reporter for the San Francisco Daily Journal. I used to work there also; we’re both journalists. We were talking – we tend to meet at the bar once in a while – and going over some ideas on what we could do that was different in terms of really producing journalistic content from within [a law firm]. And this just evolved.

Dennis Pfaff: Yeah, I think it grew organically over months of conversation. I was a print journalist for going on 30 years. I've covered energy and environmental issues for the majority of my career, going back all the way to United Press International back in the '80s, to The Detroit News, and into the legal press (which is where I spent the last 17 years).

Given the nature of print journalism, it seemed like it wouldn’t be a bad idea to see what my options might be for the remainder of my career. I had thought about doing something online for some time. Kevin and I just kept talking about this, and it basically grew out of a lot of conversations.

Kevin Livingston: It really clicked when I was in a meeting with our energy team, and they were discussing ways to market our strengths in this area of renewable energy (which we’ve been doing for about 30 years now). They were talking about a lot of the old ways of marketing, like Client Alerts and things like that. I said, "Well, wait a second, let’s do this: I have a guy who we can bring on board. He’s a professional writer, and he’s knowledgeable about the subject matter." They were pretty excited, and that clinched it.

2. Rob La Gatta: Dennis, is writing for the blog your primary job at this point?

Dennis Pfaff: Yes, it is.

2a. Rob La Gatta: I’ve seen that a lot of law blogs repackage information that’s already out there. Are you actually going out and reporting?

Kevin Livingston: That’s what differentiates us from the rest of the pack: we are doing real reporting, breaking news. We get press credentials...we’re a real publication, and we’re treated as journalists. We look at the firm as our publisher, and the site as an objective news site.

Dennis Pfaff: There is some of what you’re talking about; I’m scouring the Internet, looking for bits and pieces of information, and trying to put it together in some sort of comprehensive package. I try to tell something of a story everyday.

There are many disparate sources of information out there: other blogs, newspapers, that sort of thing. But they might be focused on one narrow element of [an issue], and I think one thing I bring to it is a global perspective, showing that what’s going on in Utah is kind of similar to what’s going on in California, maybe making some calls and trying to put together a real story.

Kevin Livingston: Yeah, we do interview people.

3. Rob La Gatta: Then it seems like what you're doing is really filling a role newspapers have occupied up until this point. Do you think these types of blogs could ultimately become how people get their news (instead of traditional publications)?

Kevin Livingston: I think to a degree. I’ve talked to newspaper editors since we launched this who actually have said, "Wow, I think this could be the future." And they’re a little frightened. I don’t know; time will tell. But I hope newspapers will still be around.

Dennis Pfaff: Yeah, so do I. I’ve still got a lot of ink in my bloodstream, and I certainly would hate to think that I’m playing a part in destroying an industry that I grew up in and love.

And, a lot of what I do is dependent on reporting of newspapers. They will be out there on the ground, doing very in-depth reporting on particular issues, and a lot of times I will piggyback on that. At the moment, I don't think there's any replacement for that source of information. I certainly couldn’t be sitting in my office in San Francisco and knowing what was going on in the minds of legislators or the governor of Kansas without the Kansas City Star helping me out on that.

Kevin Livingston: Although I think time will tell if the medium changes. More newsrooms might just go web-based in the future; 10 years down the road, you might not see actual print newspapers. I think a lot of people predict that.

[But] I think traditional journalism will survive. We’re doing our part: we’re trying to follow the same rules and ethics and everything else that traditional journalists follow. It's the same thing, just on a different platform.

4. Rob La Gatta: You’ve mentioned the response from some newspaper editors...but what about from other attorneys and law firms?

Kevin Livingston: It’s just anecdotal, and I haven’t heard a lot. But a lot of other PR and marketing people in the legal industry are convinced that this is a good idea. A PR guy I use in New York was meeting with a competing law firm, and they were a little upset that we did it first.

I think people might try to copy us a bit. Law firms already are pouring more money into their marketing budgets, and hiring a lot of people from the ranks of journalism to do a lot of different things (mostly PR, which is why I was hired out of the San Francisco Daily Journal). But I think you’re going to see more of this.

5. Rob La Gatta: Ideally, what do you want this to become? What is your ultimate goal with the Climate Law Update?

Kevin Livingston: The ultimate goal for me is to brand this firm as the leader in alternative energy. And I want to drive traffic to our website. I want people to look at our site and understand that we know what we’re doing, that we’re experts in this area. And ultimately, I want it to make money for this law firm.

Dennis Pfaff: Also, as the writer and reporter, I hope that it becomes a legitimate source of information for people who are interested in this subject area, and that it helps advance the dialogue on these issues. I don’t see a contradiction between assisting the law firm in getting it’s name out there and doing a legitimate journalistic job. I think the journalism and the approach that we’re taking actually adds credibility to what the firm is hoping to accomplish.

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

Or, see our full list of legal blog interviews.

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

Anita Campbell of Small Business Trends [LexBlog Q & A]

Today's guest for the LexBlog Q & A is Anita Campbell, an Ohio-based lawyer with a wealth of knowledge on technology issues currently serving as CEO/editor-in-chief of Small Business Trends.

Her blog, which launched in 2003 and has been going strong ever since, recently added more authors and has been further expanding its coverage of small business-focused issues. In our interview we chatted about how blogs can be used productively by lawyers (and any entrepreneur looking to expand their reach, regardless of the industry) as a community building tool. The specifics are after the jump.

1. Rob La Gatta: Why do you blog?

Anita Campbell: The reason I started and the reason I do it now are very different.

I started the blog as a way to publish a newsletter, easily and quickly. I was doing some consulting, working with small business clients – doing business plans, helping them with strategy, development and so on – and was doing an e-mail newsletter, just to develop a bit more of a customer base. But it was just taking me forever to actually create the newsletter every month. Someone said, "Go over to Blogger and start a free blog." So I did, and I started putting up little articles up there. Then, when it came time to do the newsletter, it was very simple...at the end of the month I could simply create some links, and maybe a little paragraph introduction about an article…and voila, that was my newsletter.

Of course, things have changed since then. As time went on, I realized that the Small Business Trends site got much higher rankings in the search engines that my regular business website, and so I started putting more and more time into it. And that just grew; the blog tended to get a lot of attention. (It was good timing, too, because it was when business blogs were just starting to take off in late 2003 and 2004). Gradually, it totally changed my business model. I realized I could make money with a business model where the blog was central to it.

2. Rob La Gatta: Do you think that approach is a growing trend among businesses?

Anita Campbell: I definitely think so...though I’ll qualify that by saying I don’t think a blog is for everyone. But I do think that a growing number of professionals (especially small businesses, lawyers & CPAs) really get tremendous benefit from a blog compared with the amount of money that you have to put in it. If you tried to get those same results by other means, you could spend a tiny fortune.

A blog is definitely cost effective, but there are tradeoffs...you have to spend a little more effort of your own. But I find with lawyers – who tend to be good with words – that’s really not as big of an issue as it might be with some people.

3. Rob La Gatta: Do you see a blog as something that can give a company transparency and help consumers feel more at ease?

Anita Campbell: Yes, and I think part of it comes from the conversational nature of blogs. You can talk in a more intimate way...“me to you,” if you will, as opposed to a regular website where you tend to write in marketing speak. And that creates a connection with people. They come to trust you more, and you come to have this emotional bond that you really can’t get from a traditional website. Plus, on a lot of blogs, you can talk back – a visitor can comment, and so it really does become a conversation in that sense.

4. Rob La Gatta: There are few general counsels out there blogging, but those numbers are still low. As a former GC yourself, why do you think that there aren’t many of these professionals blogging?

Anita Campbell: I think it’s difficult for larger companies to blog in the same way that I think a smaller businesses can blog. The bigger you are, the more you have to be concerned about:

  • First of all, everybody inside your company or your firm being on board;
  • second, if you’re a publicly traded company, you have concerns over what gets revealed in a blog and what can you reveal;
  • and third, with a larger company, you have more constituencies, and so you have to be concerned about all of these different angles.
That said, I think it definitely can be done. And like you said, there are some general counsels who are writing, because they find things to write about that don’t violate SEC rules and that don’t hit too close to home on customer issues that might be problematic.

5. Rob La Gatta: What do you personally see as the most rewarding element of writing a blog?

Anita Campbell: I’ve been thinking a lot lately about this idea of community. A blog lets you build a community, and it’s a community of people that could include everyone: 

  • current clients or customers,
  • those who might be checking you out to see whether they want to hire you,
  • or just the general public – who knows, someday they may become a client, or come to know you. 
You can develop a reputation as an expert in your field or niche, and blogs are perfect for that: they're cheap, and you don’t have any gatekeepers that are keeping you out of developing that reputation. If you use a blog and you think of it as developing a community, what you’re really doing is you’re extending your network...you’re able to touch more and more people, literally sitting at your desk in front of your computer.

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

Or, see our full list of legal blog interviews.

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

Steve Matthews on the state of Canada's legal blogosphere [LexBlog Q & A]

This isn't our first time featuring Stem Legal's Steve Matthews as a guest for the LexBlog Q & A; back in February, he stopped by and chatted with us about search engine optimization and how it works (or doesn't).

Today, the Vancouver-based SEO specialist is back, talking about Canadian law blogs. Bell Canada's Dominic Jaar offered us a bit of insight on the state of the Canadian legal blogosphere when we spoke to him recently...but for today's interview, that issue was the focal point. Steve's insights on where it is and where he sees it going in the future, after the jump.

1. Rob La Gatta: Is it safe to say that Canadian lawyers are not embracing the legal blogosphere as quickly as their American counterparts? Why or why not?

Steve Matthews: Actually, the Canadian legal blogosphere is right on par. The current number of lawyer blogs in the U.S. is around 2000, and the Canadian legal market is 1/20th in terms of size. My running list of Canadian law blogs on LawBlogs.ca is sitting at 116 as of April 1st, 2008. So there's really not much difference in the adoption rate.

2. Rob La Gatta: Do you have any idea at what rate Canadian legal blogs are popping up (i.e. # per month)? Do you expect the number to have a greater increase in 2008 than it did in 2007?

Steve Matthews: Because we're smaller in number, it's tough to estimate. I almost always add 1 or 2 each month, and sometimes as many as 3 or 4. I hope there will be an increase in 2008, but again it's difficult to say.

3. Rob La Gatta: Dominic Jaar has said Canada is about 3-5 years behind the U.S. when it comes to adopting new technologies. Do you believe this to be the case? If so, do you expect this rule to apply to blogging?

Steve Matthews: I would say 2-3 years. There's a definite gap, but it always depends on the firm in question and the technology. Many of the big firms, and especially the national firms, are very close to what's going on in the U.S.

Having just come from Clark Wilson in Vancouver, my perspective may also be distorted on the positive side. The firm was always progressive - combing through the ILTA conference each year, implementing new technologies, and investing on a regular basis. As an example, we were blogging internally - everyone from the mail room to the Managing Partner - several years before the concept was even mentioned in U.S. publications. Not that U.S. firms weren't doing the same, but we're Canadians... sometimes we're just (too) quiet about our innovation.

On the blogging front, I would say the lag is with our larger firms. Blogging gets some support, but it's often done under the radar, and there are few firm sponsored initiatives. I would also describe this as the demographic that is about to break through. I suspect it will only take a couple of early adopters, and the land grab will be on.

4. Rob La Gatta: As you alluded to earlier, LawBlogs.ca is living list of Canadian law blogs on the web. Does that page get a lot of traffic? When reviewing this data, is there anything that is particularly surprising to you?

Steve Matthews: The site gets several thousand visitors per month, mostly from law firms. The numbers aren't huge, but the fact that firms are checking out the competition makes me suspect at least a few of them are kicking the tires.

I'd also say that creating this list, and then moving it to its own website, was probably one of the smartest things I've done. Not only does it force me to watch for new Canadian blogs, but it also gives me a chance to get to know a lot of Canadian law bloggers. I'm a big believer in community, but communities need infrastructure. This is just my contribution.

5. Rob La Gatta: What are some of the most noticeable differences between how Canadian and American lawyers who are blogging approach it? Do you see any noteworthy patterns?

Steve Matthews: One aspect Canadian law bloggers do very well is the social side of blogging. We actively read and link to each other's blogs. There are many  great conversations, debates, and generally a strong web-community being developed.

It could be the fact that we're smaller, but I also give a lot of credit to Slaw.ca, our Canadian legal blogging co-op. Simon Fodden has done a great job of expanding both the range of participants and the topics we're discussing. There's also a core group of us that work hard at welcoming & acknowledging new Canadian legal blogs. I think that's important.

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

Or, see our full list of legal blog interviews.

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

John Sirman of the State Bar of Texas [LexBlog Q & A]

What is Texas Bar Circle? That's a good question...and one best answered by John Sirman, manager of TexasBar.com and technology editor of the Texas Bar Journal.

How fortunate it is, then, that John just happens to be our guest for today's edition of the LexBlog Q & A interview series. Though we'll leave a detailed explanation of the Circle for our interview (available after the jump), suffice to say that the site is living proof of how the right kind of social networking can bring lawyers together in a useful web-based environment...one that we can expect to see more of in the near future.

1. Rob La Gatta: Tell me a little bit about Texas Bar Circle. How did the idea for it first come about?

John Sirman: Texas Bar Circle is a social and professional network for Texas lawyers. It works very much like MySpace or Facebook, but our network is "closed" and only accessible by our members.

Before we launched Texas Bar Circle about a year ago, we had toyed with the idea for some time. We saw it as a natural offering to bar members, especially considering the social nature of the legal profession. So we approached Affinity Circles, which had previously provided networks only for alumni associations. They shared our vision and quickly built and launched Texas Bar Circle.

2. Rob La Gatta: In a January article authored by Tom Mighell for Law Practice Magazine, he notes that between June and January, approximately 2,200 attorneys had signed up for Texas Bar Circle. Since January, has that number grown any more?

John Sirman: Today we've got more than 4,600 registered users (and counting).

3. Rob La Gatta: Do you find that many of the users have simply created the account and lost interest, or is there widespread active participation?

John Sirman: My sense is there are a lot who registered and haven't been active. Our job now is to figure out how to keep people engaged and coming back to the community.

A tool like this is really what the user makes of it; the more people contribute to the community, the more they'll benefit. We've also seen lots of examples of people who are actively participating and making new connections through Texas Bar Circle.

4. Rob La Gatta: What about security? How are you guaranteeing that the information isn't accessed by anyone outside of the legal community?

John Sirman: When users register for Texas Bar Circle there are authentication steps in place that assure us they're actually Texas lawyers. So far, security hasn't been an issue.

5. Rob La Gatta: Do you expect in the future to see more online networks like this, aiming to draw together attorneys from a specific region or practice area?

John Sirman: I think online social networks of attorneys are here to stay, and that we'll see more and more of them. There are also likely to be "meta networks," which connect various social networks and allow their members to connect and collaborate outside their own groups.

I also expect us to see things we can't even imagine today. We're really at a turning point for social media, and the fun is only just beginning.

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

Or, see our full list of legal blog interviews.

Tags: , , , , ,
April 8, 2008 by Rob La Gatta

Robert Scoble of Scobleizer [LexBlog Q & A]

It's been a week since our last LexBlog Q & A. So when we finally had a free minute today to add another interview to the ongoing series, we pulled out the big guns.

Our guest? Robert Scoble, well-known technology guru and co-author (with Shel Israel, who we interviewed back in January) of the book Naked Conversations: How Blogs are Changing the way Businesses Talk with Customers. Robert, who writes the blog Scobleizer, currently works his "real job" with the tech magazine Fast Company, serving as managing director for their companion site Fast Company.TV.

Though a busy man, Robert recently took the time to answer an e-mail interview on blogs, lawyers and how he sees the two interacting. Check it out after the jump.

1. Rob La Gatta: In today's market, do you think there is any potential for vertical communities built around lawyer blogs and the content they're producing? Why or why not?

Robert Scoble: Absolutely, and not just for lawyers either. Why? Well, let's say I am looking for a lawyer. How would I find one?

  1. Play "Yellow Pages roulette" and pick one of the ads in the Yellow Pages.
  2. Ask my friends.
  3. Go to Google and search for one.

Most of your smartest, richest, most educated people will use Google. So, how do you get found in Google? Well, if you understand how Google works, it rewards companies and people who:

  1. Pour a lot of content into the site.
  2. Get a lot of links from other places, especially ones with influential inbound links themselves.

What's the best way to get both of these done? A blog, of course. So, if you're a lawyer and you want to be found on Google, it makes total sense to regularly update a blog and teach people about your field.

2. Rob La Gatta: If a company was interested in using video as a marketing tool, how would you suggest they go about doing so in a way that had some value? Any major do's or don'ts?

Robert Scoble: One show I'd watch for some insight into how to use video to build an offline business is Wine Library TV. That's done by Gary Vaynerchuk, who owns a wine store in New Jersey that sells $50 million of wine every year. He is already seeing a big impact on his business from his video blog, which now is getting 60,000 viewers per episode. He told me a story of how people now drive thousands of miles to see his store and take pictures with him.

3. Rob La Gatta: Why do you think many companies outside of the tech world haven't started blogs to engage in conversation with the general public?

Robert Scoble: Many businesspeople don't hang out online everyday and don't see the waves of people who are now using Google instead of traditional media to find businesses.

3a. Rob La Gatta: Do you expect that this will ultimately be a necessity for companies looking to succeed?

Robert Scoble: Absolutely. It already is incredibly stupid if you are in business and you haven't spent a lot of time figuring out how to get found in search engines.

4. Rob La Gatta: What about for the law: does the premise of Naked Conversations also apply to lawyers? Why or why not?

Robert Scoble: Absolutely. It applies to all businesses...at least businesses that need to grow by having new customers find them.

If you don't care about finding new customers, or if you think that ads in newspapers, on TV, or in the Yellow Pages are going to serve you well, then maybe. I think that's an incredibly stupid way to look at business, though. Most of the smartest, richest, most educated people are online and will only look for you online. They'll go to your competition if you don't have a way to be found (which, to me, is a blog).

5. Rob La Gatta: What do you see as the single most personally rewarding aspect of blogging?

Building relationships with great people in the world. Without blogs I'd never have met Kevin or Rob, for instance, who put together this blog.

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

Or, see our full list of legal blog interviews.

Tags: , ,
April 1, 2008 by Rob La Gatta

John Bolch of Family Lore [LexBlog Q & A]

Our guest for today's LexBlog Q & A is John Bolch, the second UK-based law blogger to be featured in the hot seat. John has been practicing family law since becoming a solicitor on April 1, 1985 - that's 23 years ago from today - and writes the law blog Family Lore.

After our first English guest Nick Holmes called John the "leading UK family law blogger," we decided to track him down for an interview. The end result - in which John offers insights on the state of the English blogosphere, how it differs from its American counterpart, and where he sees the whole thing going - is available after the jump.

1. Rob La Gatta: Do you think it's safe to say that attorneys in the UK are taking longer to enter the blogosphere than Americans? Why or why not?

John Bolch: This is probably true, although obviously there are far fewer attorneys in the UK - I don't know what the proportion of law blogs to attorneys is in each country.

What is the reason for this? Well, it does seem that lawyers over here are generally less computer-literate than their American counterparts. They also seem to be far more resistant to change, and perhaps even suspicious of new technologies...especially an interactive technology such as blogging, over which they may fear they do not have complete control.

2. Rob La Gatta: Your blog features posts dating back to early 2006. What made you start blogging at a time when many UK lawyers were not?

John Bolch: I have long been interested in computing - I purchased my first computer way back in 1983, long before most law firms over here possessed one. I was therefore aware of blogging almost from the start, and had been contemplating writing my own blog for some while. I was held back by concerns that I would not have anything interesting to say.

Then, in January 2006, I read an article about law blogs in the Law Society's Gazette and thought: why not? After all, I had more than 20 years' experience to call upon. Family Lore was up and running within a couple of days.

3. Rob La Gatta: Do you think the UK attorneys that have started blogging are seeing any business benefits from it? Are you?

John Bolch: I think this depends upon the type of blog. A number of UK law blogs are written anonymously (something I can't recall coming across in the US), and obviously they will see little or no direct benefit. Other blogs are clearly written as an advertisement for the skills and expertise of the blogger (some are an integral part of their firm's website) and I suspect that they are directly attracting some clients. Attracting business is not the primary purpose of my blog (if it were, I would be rather more circumspect with what I post!) and the number of clients it has brought me is small, although this does seem to be increasing.

4. Rob La Gatta: In America, different state bar associations have different regulations on blogging, some of which are far more restrictive than others. Are there any such laws in the UK governing what an attorney can or cannot say when blogging?

John Bolch: So far as I am aware, none of the UK professional bodies yet have any regulations specific to blogging, although I believe some larger firms have their own in-house rules.

5. Rob La Gatta: When and if the English legal blogosphere takes off, who do you think will drive it: large firms? Small firms? GCs? Solo practitioners?

John Bolch: If the English legal blogosphere does take off, my feeling is that it will be mostly driven by small to medium-sized firms, possibly as their only web presence, as the format is a cost-effective way to raise their profile - provided they are prepared to put the effort in to maintain the blog.

The other thing to say here is that we do of course have a split profession over here, and it may be that the personal nature of blogging is more attractive to barristers than solicitors - I think it’s already true that a higher proportion of barristers have embraced blogging.

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

 Or, see our full list of legal blog interviews.

Tags: , , ,