Comments on Stop blogging? Thinking of starting a blog, forget it? | Real Lawyers Have Blogs

xlambert@gmail.com (Greg Lambert) — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 09:12:40 -0800

Good response Kevin. I think that Paul's over-generalization of what you can do with a blog is being met with the skepticism that it deserves. If Twitter is considered micro-blogging, the blogging should be considered micro-publishing. Seems that Paul and others on the "stop blogging" campaign are thinking that blogs are micro-journalism, and they are missing the promise of sites that have small, but appreciative readership. Even those that don't generate any comments can still be effective for the reader.

tom.lanez@gmail.com (Tom) — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 09:57:45 -0800

This is called link-baiting, and all the tech bloggers worth their weight called him on it.

advantageadvocates@comcast.net (Martha) — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 15:02:48 -0800

Excellent post on Mr. Boutin's controversial article. I particularly agree with your final comment and believe Mr. Boutin hit his intended paydirt. But for those who understand and appreciate blogs and utilize them to their best advantage, Mr. Boutin's critiques have no merit. I'll keep writing my blawg and reading yours, as well as follow interesting Twitter feeds and grow my social networking connections, because it's ALL good.

Regards

shglaw@aol.com (shg) — Sat, 01 Nov 2008 15:09:54 -0800

Only 2 or 3 comments? Nuts, I'm doing that wrong too?

firm@harrismoure.com (Dan Harris) — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 17:32:51 -0800

Kevin,

I nearly always agree with you, but on this I think the Wired writer as a point. The reality is that if there are already 100 blogs out there on employment law and 10 of those already have a really good following, it is going to be very very difficult for the newbie to get an audience. The other reality is that 98% of all law blogs suck because they are written by lawyers who either do not know how to entertain or are flat out afraid to do so. It just seems to me that nine out of ten law blogs end up closing up shop within six months of their inception.

So I'm throwing down the gauntlet on this one.

kevin@lexblog.com (Kevin OKeefe) — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 20:16:00 -0800

Your point is well taken Dan. You're right there with Scott Greenfield, another lawyer and prolific blogger I have a lot of respect for.

I'll agree not all law blogs are good ones. Many lawyers have not mastered the concept of blogs being a conversation, as opposed to just publishing info ala alerts and newsletters. Then there's also those offering no value or just touting their services.

I don't agree that the goal of a blog is just to become one of the most widely read, ie, in the top 3 or top 10 in employment law. Blogs can be used very effectively for networking, reputation enhancement, and business growth even where there are other popular blogs on the subject.

If there were already 3 lawyers in Seattle doing empoyment work for small businesses with less than 100 lawyers, should the lawyer conclude it's too late to do employment work here. 'I'll never be in the top 3, these guys have been doing it for years. I wanted to do employment law and I think I'm pretty good at it, but no can do.' I don't buy it.

Lawyers with a desire and passion to blog in an area of law will find having a ready network of lawyers publishing on a subject to be an advantage. It's like having a panel discussion on the subject going on every day.

As a new employment law blogger, you enter that discussion, the lawyers already blogging will reference you and your content, and you'll get seen as an authority by employers and those who influence them. Work follows.

Sure, there's an advantage being first to blog on a topic, just like there is an advantage being the first lawyer in town to begin networking one's practice in a niche. But no lawyer should decide not to follow their passion because someone is already covering it. God knows, we need all to good passionate and caring lawyers we can find.

firm@harrismoure.com (Dan) — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 22:44:37 -0800

I'm backing down a bit. The reality is that it has gotten a lot harder for the mediocre blog to get anywhere at all, but there will always be plenty of room for the really good blog.

amy@infoworks1.com (Amy Campbell) — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 06:06:19 -0800

This is a great discussion with good points on all sides. But I would have to agree that the Wired article is hyperbole. And, although I would hope anyone would undertake any web publishing effort with a goal to create a good product/service... even a mediocre blog is better than nothing. It's like saying you should have abandoned your web site for a blog and now you should abandon you blog for Twitter. They all have their purpose... it is a continuation of the splintering of mass media. What's next, IRTNOG?

dominic@dc-strategic.com (Dominic Canterbury) — Mon, 01 Dec 2008 22:26:57 -0800

I completely agree with you, Kevin.
Especially for attorneys, blogging is about much more than making a human connection. It's about giving substantive information and insights that actually prove your credibility. Twitter and Facebook are just not up to the task.