I'm amused reading pundits pontificating whether blogs are appropriate or a cost effective marketing tool for large law firms.

Those casting doubt fall in two camps. One is the uninformed. The second are those who have an interest in seeing law firms continue to buy or use less effective and much more expensive marketing tools (vendors and law firm employees wrongly believing blogs will cost them their job).

The fact is law blogs are an effective marketing tool for large law (and despite the Chicken Little's raising ethics & liability issues, they're safe).

The proof is looking at what is going on.

• Over 25% of AmLaw 200 law firms have blogs.
• 10% of AmLaw 200 law firms have more than one blog.
• 36% growth in last 6 months in the number of AmLaw 200 law firms publishing blogs.
• 49% growth in last 6 months in total number of blogs being published by AmLaw 200 law firms.

LexBlog is doing more blog work for AmLaw 200 firms than all the other blog service providers combined. And I can tell you large law firms are not using blogs as a diversion. They are using blogs as a very effective marketing tool to retain existing clients, to pick up work in new areas of practice for existing clients, and to get new clients.

Not one AmLaw 200 law firm has ever said blogging takes too much time or complained that the blog was not a success. Not only has LexBlog never had an AmLaw 200 firm stop publishing a blog, the majority of our clients are adding multiple blogs.

These blog marketing projects are in most cases driven or approved by innovative leaders in large law firms. Those administrative partners and chief marketing officers are focused on the bottom line, the financial health of their law firms. Blogs are a marketing device, not a diversion for them.

So you'll know I am not making this stuff up, I want to share the success of one large law firm lawyer. Dan Schwartz, who just joined Pullman & Comley started his Connecticut Employment Law Blog last fall while a partner at AmLaw 200 firm, Epstein Becker & Green.

In the first 6 weeks of blogging while with the large law firm:

• 5000 unique visitors
• Few prospective client calls a week and one new client
• Nearly 100 incoming links from third party websites and blogs
• Regularly cited by leading law & employment bloggers (3 of the most widely read)
• Article on Dan and his blog in Connecticut legal periodical

I thought of Dan's story because of an email from him a couple evenings ago sharing recent successes.

The [new firm] is very receptive to the blog...

The blog has led to some very favorable press for me the last week... The Hartford Business Journalwrote an article about a food server case that I blogged about a few weeks ago. The reporter saw my blog on the case and called me for quotes.

Business New Haven, another good solid niche business publication, saw my blog on employment law and called me about law firm mandatory retirement. They even mentioned my blog with a link to it. Cool stuff.

And to top it off, a producer from 60 Minutes called me this afternoon after seeing my blog article on USERRA (military leave laws) and wondering if I knew of employers who could talk about it (and talking to me about it for a few minutes).

(And I've gotten a new client off of it recently too.)

When giving me approval to share his email, Dan said "Just don't make it sound like I'm Superman or a publicity hound. The blog has just led to it."

As a former trial lawyer of 17 years, I know you need to keep proving what can seem like the same case again and again to a different jury who didn't believe until they understood the facts. Won't surprise me to be making the argument on the marketing effectiveness of blogs for large law firms 4 or 5 years from now.

Not surprisingly, Craig has some insights into the role blogs are playing in journalism...and much more. See the full text of our interview after the jump.

1. Rob La Gatta: Why did you first start May It Please The Court back in 2004?

Craig Williams: I got an e-mail from a lawyer in Maryland who started a blog, and he gave me the idea. It had been something that I started back in 2000 on a very rudimentary basis, simply summarizing slip opinions in English (or something that was easier to understand than the way that the court wrote it) and putting it up on the website. But it was very clunky and it took a lot of time, because there was no Wordpress or Typepad or anything that made it easy to do. It was, "write it, send it off to the webmaster and allow him to put it up on the website.”

That didn’t work very well, and I stopped doing it. So when I saw someone else using Wordpress and publishing a blog - doing basically the same thing I was doing - I thought it would be a great opportunity to continue what I had started earlier.

It seemed to make sense: it would create a way for people to be able to find you more frequently on the Internet. Law firm websites were just static brochures, and by increasing the content, I thought it would make it more interesting to potential clients. Lo and behold, the idea that I had had in the beginning was the very idea that Google now uses to rank its search results.

2. Rob La Gatta: In an interview from 2004, shortly after starting the blog, you said that it had already brought you some significant business. Has that momentum kept up, even with so many more lawyers blogging now? Do you still see positive business impacts from the blog?

Craig Williams: I do. We track the blog, and upwards of 25% of the people that retain us find us from the Internet.

You have to understand, I’ve been doing it for five years. And there’s an awful lot of [my content] out there. As a consequence, the blog has kind of become this self propagating machine...it continually puts me in situations that I would not have otherwise have been in.

For example, I’m speaking in Oklahoma in August. I would have never had that opportunity had it not been for the blog. I’m publishing a book that’s coming out in June. Had it not been for the blog, that book would have never been published.

3. Rob La Gatta: You started podcasting in 2005, correct? Was podcasting designed as an extension of the blog, or something else altogether?

Craig Williams: I had actually started before that; I started on my own in 2004...again a very rudimentary effort, because all I was doing was reading my posts and putting them up as audio files.

[Podcasting] was a co-component of the blog. I got my third class FCC license to broadcast radio when I was in 9th grade. I had a radio show at the local high school, and then when I got into college, I had a commercial radio show. So I have been podcasting/broadcasting for a very long period of time, and I really enjoy it.

4. Rob La Gatta: Do you see the line between bloggers and journalists getting thinner? Do you think that eventually blogging lawyers will be able to essentially become the journalists who cover their own niche?

Craig Williams: I think it’s already that way. Lawyers who cover their own niche have already taken over traditional journalists...I’m not sure if from a writing level, but definitely from a content level. It seems to me to be entirely logical that if I want to know about unfair competition law, I can go to Kimberly Kralowec's blog and read the latest developments, or try to search up something in the Los Angeles Times or the New York Times. The option is fairly clear.

5. Rob La Gatta: What is the biggest challenge and the biggest reward you’ve encountered during your time blogging?

Craig Williams: The biggest challenge has been writing consistently and constantly while trying to practice law, and keeping it interesting.

The biggest reward? That’s a tough one. I would say the biggest reward for me is making friends all across the world through the blog. It’s just been an amazing extension of myself to be able to reach out, to meet people in London, France, Italy, Australia and across the country. The [biggest reward is the] friendship that automatically occurs from a small number of us doing the same thing, and the camaraderie that goes along with it.

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

• Doug Cornelius, attorney with Goodwin Procter who writes the blogs KM Space and Real Estate Space [2.16.08]
• Greg Storey, principal of Airbag Industries [2.15.08]
• Edward Still, publisher of the legal blog Votelaw [2.14.08]
• Ken Adams, drafting consultant and author of the AdamsDrafting blog [2.13.08]
• Susannah Gardner, author of Buzz Marketing with Blogs for Dummies [2.11.08]

In part 1, Tom discussed how they developed their wiki companion to SCOTUSblog and why he doesn't think wikis will become the norm in the legal blogosphere. Today the focus shifts more to the day-to-day operation of SCOTUSblog itself.

3. Rob La Gatta: In our recent interview with Bob Ambrogi, he said that he believes other law bloggers will look to SCOTUSblog as a model in coming years. Do you believe this to be the case? Have you noticed it happening already?

Tom Goldstein: Well, that’s a terrific compliment from Bob. We’ve definitely noticed several other people trying to do what we do with a different focus: they blog about just one circuit court, say, or the courts of a particular state.

But generally, I don’t think most people blog to accomplish the same goals as we do. Most people in the legal blogosphere (blawgosphere?) offer up their opinions on the law, which can be endlessly fascinating and produce some great discussions. That’s not really the game we are in, though, so I don’t know how much they are using us as a model for their sites.

4. Rob La Gatta: Since so many people see your blog on a daily basis (I’ve even heard a rumor that one of your posts caught an overlooked error in a published SCOTUS opinion), what types of editorial controls do you have in place to ensure accuracy? Do you believe you and your writers hold yourselves to the same standards as a traditional publication?

Tom Goldstein: We certainly try to hold ourselves to some high standards. Our reputation for accuracy and fairness really begins with Lyle Denniston, who has been covering the Court for 50 years. We’re lucky to have a blogger that refuses to dip below the very high standards he set for himself at The Wall Street Journal and Baltimore Sun, among others.

Editorially, we have weekly meetings among all of our contributors to ensure that we are being as comprehensive and as objective as we can be. When we discuss the merits of cases on the blog, we go out of our way to bring in voices from all sides of the discussion. We’ve posted exchanges with legal scholars from the right, left, and center. We know that we cover an institution that is often used by both sides as a rallying cry for their bases, so we need to try that much harder to stay above the fray.

I think we’ve done that so far: for example, for the upcoming case about the Second Amendment and handgun rights, which has become really highly-charged on both sides, we’ve become a go-to resource for people with all different perspectives. I have to say that one of the things I’m most proud of in the years since we started SCOTUSblog is that we’re respected by people with a huge variety of legal and political views.

5. Rob La Gatta: SCOTUSblog has been around for nearly 4 years. Is there anything you know now about the art of blogging that you wish you knew when you first got started?

Tom Goldstein: That’s an interesting question. I will say that if I had known how hard it was to generate fresh content and stay current 365 days a year, I may never have started it in the first place!

I’m kidding, of course. But I’ve learned that publishing a useful blog has proved to be a round-the-clock, day-in, day-out endeavor, and I’m not sure anyone quite grasps that going in. Still, despite the extra work, it’s been extremely rewarding in so many ways. I wouldn’t change anything about what we’ve done, really.

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

• Rick Klau, former VP of publisher services at FeedBurner and current member of Google's content acquisition team [1.29.08]
• Dan Harris, Seattle international law lawyer & publisher of the China Law Blog [1.28.08]
• Daniel Schuman of the American Constitution Society's ACS Blog [1.25.08]
• Tim Titolo, Las Vegas personal injury lawyer & publisher of the Brain & Spine Injury Law Blog [1.24.08]
• Eugene Volokh, UCLA School of Law professor & founder of The Volokh Conspiracy [1.23.08]

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:

• Rick Klau, former VP of publisher services at FeedBurner and current member of Google's content acquisition team [1.29.08]
• Dan Harris, Seattle international law lawyer & publisher of the China Law Blog [1.28.08]
• Daniel Schuman of the American Constitution Society's ACS Blog [1.25.08]
• Tim Titolo, Las Vegas personal injury lawyer & publisher of the Brain & Spine Injury Law Blog [1.24.08]
• Eugene Volokh, UCLA School of Law professor & founder of The Volokh Conspiracy [1.23.08]

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:

• Dan Clement [1.22.08]
• Eric Goldman [1.17.08]
• Tom Kane [1.16.08]
• Shel Israel [1.15.08]
• Cliff Mintz [1.14.08]
  

Mike Fox at Jottings By An Employer's Lawyer has the details.

[Dan] was keen enough to pass along a caution that the FMLA expansion that has been mentioned in several blogs recently (including this one), seems to have hit a Presidential snag.

[...]

What's more impressive is that Dan is apparently the first to make the connection between the well publicized veto and the hit to the FMLA expansion, as my google news search a moment ago for "fmla and veto" came up with no hits. A huge tip of the hat for a scoop not only in the (relatively) small world of employment law blogging, but of the big time media as well.

While Dan is using the holiday season as an opportunity to stay on top of the law (and to report in it in an even more timely fashion than much of the mainstream media), his blog is serving as a portal between the nation's capitol and the legal blogging community. And as Mike Fox's post indicates, tech savvy lawyers across the country are taking note.

Note: This isn't the first time Dan has crossed our radar. His posts are frequently included in daily LexBlogosphere updates (which are worth looking at if you haven't yet checked them out), and we even featured Dan in a recent LexBlog Q & A.

Blogs may not be for everyone but some businesses such as consultants are obvious candidates, says Aliza Sherman Risdahl, author of The Everything Blogging Book.

They are experts in their fields and are in the business of telling people what to do.

As a consultant, blogging clearly helps you get hired. If you are selling a product, you have to be much more creative because people don't want to read a commercial.

David Harlow, a lawyer and health care consultant in Boston, was quoted for his success with his HealthBlawg. He used it when he started his own practice after leaving a large firm.

He gets about 200 to 300 visits a day, he said. He has also become a source for publications looking for commentary on regulatory issues in the health care field and has even gained a few clients because of the blog. In addition, he has formed relationships with other legal bloggers (who call themselves blawgers) and consultants around the country.

The word of mouth component marketing component of blogs was covered as well. Tony Stubblebine, the chief executive of a Silicon Valley software company told Albahor he gets new customers largely by word of mouth, and he uses his blog as a way to share news with friends and people who wield influence in his industry.

I'm trying to create a community of help for small Internet businesses like mine. My blogging philosophy is like the open source model in software. It's sort of a hippie concept. If I can help other people, it's personally rewarding. And those people will likely pay it back in some ways.

Plus for companies in the technology sector, Stubblebine believes having a blog is pretty much expected.

When I started blogging in 2003, I was hoping to find one news story on blogs a week. Can't go a day anymore.

Heck, when I got home tonight my wife, Jill, asked if I saw the articles on blogs in today's Seattle Times. More consumer oriented than business, one covering Starbucks Gossip, and the other on niche bloggers earning money through advertising. Nonetheless, blogs are all around us and definitely here to stay.

Just today at Overlawyered David was described as being out in front of, as he so often is, new developments in the Skrugg case:

Yes, it seems there were wiretaps. Defendants will be seeing evidence from the prosecution momentarily which might (or might not) be the trigger for further flipping and early plea deals, if such there will be.

There is enormous curiosity (e.g.) about P.L. Blake, to whom Scruggs says he paid $10 million (and tens of millions more in future payments) for vaguely described intelligence services aimed at swaying political influentials during the tobacco caper. Per a 1997 account posted at Y'All Politics, 'Blake pleaded 'no contest' in 1988 to a federal charge that he conspired to bribe officials of the now- defunct Mississippi Bank to secure favorable loan terms.' The same article, citing reporting in the Jackson Clarion-Ledger, reports that Blake was in close phone contact between 1994 and 1996 with eventually-disgraced state Auditor Steve Patterson, who after leaving office went into partnership with Timothy Balducci and is one of the five indicted in the current Scruggs affair. Per AP, 'Patterson was a banker at Mississippi Bank before his 1984-1987 tenure as head of the Mississippi Democratic Party.'

David Rossmiller, as so often, is out front with a report filling in background on two other controversies involving Blake. One arose from a venture into the grain storage business which landed him in a Texas dispute in which his attorney was none other than Fred Thompson, later a Tennessee senator and presidential candidate. The other arose from his cordial dealings with a former chief of staff to Sen. Trent Lott (R-Mississippi).

In David's interview with the Wall Street Journal Law Blog last week regarding the Scruggs case, the Journal's Ashby Jones posed a good question: why doesn't David just pack his suitcase and leave Portland behind for a few days to see what's going in Mississippi for himself? David seemed receptive to the idea.

I’d love to. These people in Mississippi have been really good to me, and I feel like a lot of them are family to me; that Mississippi is like a second home. But I have three kids and a day job! I can’t just up and go down there, even though I’d absolutely love to. Now, if someone offered me a book deal . . .

The media should jump all over this opportunity; David has been consistently on his game and seems the natural choice as a knowledgeable go-to guy on the Scruggs case. The only question is, who's going to send him there? We've got some suggestions:

• Greta Van Susteren of Fox News On the Record and whose own blog, GretaWire is hitting the stratosphere. At least have David join the legal panel one night.
• CNN's Anderson Cooper (get Jeffrey Toobin off the case, Anderson...David's got it covered)
• Andrew Sullivan of The Atlantic Monthly
• MSNBC's Dan Abrams, host of "Live with Dan Abrams"

Dan, who runs the Connecticut Employment Law Blog and is a partner in the Labor & Employment practice at Epstein Becker & Green, updates his blog with new content almost every day of the work week. In a phone interview this morning, I spoke with Dan about how he manages to blog so often, his tricks for increasing blog traffic, and how media coverage of the blog has impacted his reputation at the office.

1. Rob La Gatta: To start, lets talk about your blogging routine: you post a lot, and your updates are often lengthy. Do you schedule time each day to blog, and do you map out in advance what issues you will cover? Or is it something you don’t decide until you sit down in front of the computer.

Daniel Schwartz: I try to do it either in the evenings and schedule the post for the following morning, or I try to do it first thing in the morning, before the phones start ringing and clients start e-mailing. Typically what I’ll do is, during the day, I may star some stories from Google Reader to follow up on, or check the court dockets to see if any new decision has come down. Sometimes there’s a pressing matter where you want to update it immediately. But I try to reserve the time for both the beginning and end of the workday.

I end up updating really every business day. I’ve decided not to post on weekends, because no one really reads it [then].

2.Rob La Gatta: All lawyers are experts in their respective fields, but only so many of them can be recognized as such. Do you believe blogging is an effective method for establishing yourself as a recognized expert in employment law?

Daniel Schwartz: I do. I think it is an effective way to essentially demonstrate your expertise to people, instead of telling them that you’re an expert. I think that when you’re able to write about a particular subject matter in particular detail, people tend to respect that much more than [if you are] just pounding on your chest and proclaiming to the world, ‘I am the greatest!’

I’ve tried to make it a point of picking out topics that I find of interest and that I think others might, and getting into a bit of detail that can explain a subject a little more – and may ultimately provide the answers to sort of general questions that people out there might have.

3.Rob La Gatta: I noticed on the about page of your blog, you specifically mention that reader participation – through comments, e-mails, etc – was crucial to the blog's long-term success. Have you gotten this type of response from readers so far?

Daniel Schwartz: I have. It really is a conversation...[you are] entering into a dialogue. I’ve made an effort to reach out to other blogs and comment on them, which in turn has those people look[ing] at my blog and comment as well. From that sense, it’s really been a terrific help in spreading the word and discussing subjects in more detail.

Ultimately, other blogs – such as Above the Law or Point of Law – have picked up on my employment law topics, which may reach a larger audience [because of] it. And I’ve also gotten calls from prospective clients and newspaper reporters that would not have otherwise found me.

4.Rob La Gatta: Yes, about that: I noticed that you’ve recently generated some respectable media exposure. Has this had any impact on how you are received by other lawyers within the firm? Are you given any voice in discussions on marketing issues?

Daniel Schwartz: In fact, I’ve been tasked within my firm – based on the success that we’ve had with the blog – [to look] at other blogs that the firm or other attorneys within my firm can do, and at specific targeted areas where we can provide some additional insight and background, given our involvement in the field.

I think, as with any larger firm, there is always reluctance to try something new. But they have been supportive throughout, and every time the blog gets mentioned in the media, much like it would for other attorneys, the firm has posted it – both internally and externally. It shows the success that the blog can have, of getting referenced in the media and building your word of mouth.

5. Rob La Gatta: f you were to meet a lawyer just starting his or her first blog, what is the single most important bit of advice you’d offer them? Why?

Daniel Schwartz: I think you need to want to do a blog, and I think you need to enjoy doing a blog.

I have found that blogging fits within the marketing and overall approach that I want to take to my practice. It gives me an outlet to do some writing, and it gives me an excuse to keep up on recent developments in the law. I think we all have limits on our time, and I end up sometimes blogging from home with my kids sitting next to me, on my laptop. But I view it as something I enjoy doing rather than as work, and I think if you want to do a blog, you need to do it for the right reasons. It’s not a one shot endeavor; it’s a work in progress that you build on.

Ultimately, I can look back on this, and I’ve got dozens and dozens of articles on various subjects that are a reference, not only to people out there, but to myself as well.

That's it for today's interview. Know someone you think lawyers might be interested in hearing from? Drop me their name in an e-mail and we'll see if we can sit them down for a LexBlog Q & A.

Meanwhile, don't forget to check out our past legal blog interviews.

It's part of Steve's involvement in Canadian legal web publishing. He's already launched LegalPubs.ca, a one stop showcase of the products offered by Canadian legal publishers. Using RSS technology, LegalPubs serves up the latest from Canada Law Book, Irwin Law, CCH Canadian, Lexis Nexis Canada, and Thomson Carswell.

The guys on a role.

LexBlog client and insurance lawyer,

Yesterday the WSJ Baw blog named him law blogger of the day. Today David's picked up in the WSJ hard copy in Nathan Koppel's story, 'How Scruggs Case Engulfs Life of an Insurance Blogger.'

One of the more unlikely figures to have emerged as a prominent voice on the saga in Mississippi involving famed plaintiffs lawyer Richard 'Dickie' Scruggs is an insurance lawyer in Portland, Ore., who's never set foot in the state.

Somehow, in between his day job as a law-firm partner and his night job as a husband and father to three young children, David Rossmiller blogs about insurance. These days, he's 95% focused on the Scruggs affair, in which he has no formal role. On the matter, he has been cited in publications including the New Orleans Times-Picayune, the Los Angeles Times and the online magazine Slate.

The blog, insurancecoverageblog.com, began in early 2006 as a repository for Mr. Rossmiller's thoughts on the insurance industry. But earlier this year, he says, he delved into the coverage battles involving Hurricane Katrina victims and State Farm Insurance Co., which he found 'absolutely fascinating.' He weighed in on court decisions, focusing largely on clauses in many homeowner policies that, asserted lawyers for policyholders, State Farm was using to justify denials in coverage.

For lawyers sitting on the fence about doing a blog or who may be listening to the blog naysayers, give David a call. Talking to him, which I did yesterday, is inspiring to the last. It leaves you with little question that a well done law blog focused on a niche in which the blogger engages in the online conversation can change one's life dramatically, both professionally and personally.

It's not unusual for me to get emails inquiring about blogs in the middle of the night. Exchanging emails with lawyers on weekends is the rule rather than the exception. And I see LexBlog clients posting content 24 hours a day.

Admittedly there a lot of hard working people in all fields and most lawyers earn more than average Americans. But this dedication to blogging (or at least to learn how to get started) is a testament to lawyers and their dedication to learn, exchange information, and market themselves in an upbeat and professional way.

Any lawyer can run a yellow page ad, have marketing professionals churn out collateral material, or do a web site. But blogging requires a decision to give of yourself.

Blogging requires learning how to do something new - even scary to lawyers unfamiliar with online networking. And most of all, blogging requires a commitment to continue to give of yourself by publishing content and exchanging information in your niche area of law. Blogging lawyers, age 35, are going to be blogging for the next 25 years.

To you lawyers out there blogging and learning to blog, thanks. It's an honor to be able to serve you in a small way.

LexBlog client Proskauer Rose (Privacy Law Blog) garnered the top spot, but the rest of the list, including in-depth profiles, is pay to view.

I'd like to highlight the impact of blog marketing on the list. I've emailed Elizabeth Anne 'Betiayn' Tursi, the editor in chief, to see if I can get a copy of the list.

Among other reporters, Ezell referenced the work of reporter Gordon Jackson, who blogged from inside a Georgia courtroom about a high-profile murder case and highlighted the advantages of reporter's blogs.

First, the reporter provides more information and insight than can be found in news stories constrained by space and the restrictions of traditional straight-forward writing style.

Jackson wrote in greater depth about the trial of physician Noel Chua, for example, providing more details about each witness's testimony than would get into the print edition.

.....

Second, blogs foster interactions with readers, even from afar...

.....

Finally, blogging allows writers to be more informal and more venturesome in their reporting, even as they take care not to lapse into commentary and opinion.

I agree wholeheartedly with Times-Union Editor, Pat Yack, "Done right - timely and crisply - blogs do have a great value."

One of which is TechCrunch, founded by former Wilson Sonsini lawyer and tech entrepreneur, Michael Arrington. Sam Zuckerman features the TechCrunch blog (now media company) in this morning's San Francisco Chronicle.

In 2005, when Silicon Valley entrepreneur Michael Arrington started TechCrunch, his popular blog on Internet startups, he saw it mainly as a chance to indulge his obsession with young technology companies. But it turned out that Arrington had latched onto something big. TechCrunch became the go-to site for the scoop on new Web companies......Today, TechCrunch has a full-time staff of eight. This year, it hired a CEO. In August, 1.25 million people visited TechCrunch or its affiliated blogs at least once, according to comScore Inc. It brings in $240,000 per month in advertising, according to Arrington, and pulls in additional revenue from conferences and parties. Most important of all, TechCrunch is in the black.

What's even more interesting, per Zuckerman, is that blogs, something still dismissed by major publishers as ranting diaries, are morphing into a major publishing force.

From the blogosphere's anarchistic roots, a professional cadre is emerging that is creating an industry whose top-performing businesses now earn serious money. The industry is expanding at warp speed. Blog-based media could just be poised to elbow aside traditional print and broadcast outlets to become one of the dominant sources of news, information and opinion, many observers believe. 'As traditional media continue to contract, this stuff is going to expand,' said Steve King, senior fellow with the Society for New Communications Research, a Palo Alto think tank. 'The business models have caught up and you're starting to see little blog publishing companies that frankly are becoming not so little.'

The blogging world has tremendous strengths - original voices, provocative opinions, imagination and intimate knowledge of a variety of subjects.

Admittedly, blogs such as TechCrunch and GigaOm, also highlighted in the Chronicle are the exception. The vast, vast majority of blogs do not create any significant revenue. Talking this week with a blogger at b5media, a global blog network, he believed that one could crack the top 100 in blog revenue by earning fairly low sums.

Key though is Zuckerman's point that blogs have great strengths, law blogs included. "..[O]riginal voices, provocative opinions, imagination and intimate knowledge of a variety of subjects," make it possible for law blogs to supplant traditional print legal media, which is going to continue to contract.

The whole discussion arose out of Bashman's publishing a 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on a case filed by a Sept. 11 detainee. Turns out the case was filed under seal because of national security issues. The Court mistakenly made the decision public. A court clerk called Bashman asking him to take the discussion down from his blog. Bashman declined arguing as a journalist and member of the media, he needed to keep a post up which thousands had already seen, emailed to others, and blogged about.

Regardless of what folks think about Bashman's refusal, whether as a journalist or officer of the court, there's not much argument that as a law blogger, folks believe Bashman is a journalist.

• Matthew Felling at CBS' Public Eye: As far as this writer is concerned, Bashman fits the bill.
• Law Professor Daniel Solove at Concurring Opinions: I believe that anybody can be a journalist -- a journalist is what a journalist does. In other words, being associated with a mainstream media entity doesn't determine who is a journalist and who is not. One doesn't need to be part of any organization to report information to the public.
• Law Professor Eric Goldman, commenting at Concurring Opinions: If we were building the law from scratch today, there is no way we would try to "privilege" journalists from other types of content publishers and disseminators. That distinction is simply too incoherent in an era where everyone has equal access to an infinite audience.
• Mark Obbie at LawBeat of The Carnegie Legal Reporting Program at Syracuse University: Bashman's backbone is even more admirable than the average journalist's -- if put in a similar position -- because Bashman's day job depends on the good graces of appellate courts. When the government overreaches to keep the public's business secret, journalists must stand up and be counted. That's easier when the worst they can do is be mad at you. Bashman did more.
• The Blog of the Legal Times: Bashman then took the classic stance of journalists in opposition to government secrecy: "In my role as a member of the news media, I determined that it would be inappropriate to take down my posting of the decision based on a general claim that the opinion, issued earlier in the day to the public over the internet, referred to information contained in an appendix whose contents remained under seal."

Not much question either following Wikipedia's definition of a journalist:

A journalist is a person who practices journalism, the gathering and dissemination of information about current events, trends, issues and people.

As an aside, today I'm unable to pull up Bashman's posts on the subject (or any of his posts after 10/8/07) so not certain what is transpiring.

29 comments with nominations so far. Some real reaches in what folks consider the best.

My questions may be a bit hard to hear (I'll pack another mic next time), so here's what I asked.

• Will you describe your first experience writing for a blog?
• How do you think your writing voice has changed from when you started to where you are now?
• Do you have a specific routine for blogging? Where do you write best - is it at home? In the office?
• If you were to offer one bit of advice to a lawyer who was just starting their first blog, what would it be?

Darren found it took just 20 minutes for a recent post of his to show up on Google. Decided to test it out myself.

I posted on the 'State of UK law blogs' about a half hour ago. Just went to Google and searched for state of UK law blogs. Here's the #1 result.

Not too shabby.

Although a handful of UK law bloggers were active before 2006, it was only then that the UK blawgosphere started to take off. Since then, new law blogs have continued to appear at the rate of about one a week.

On infolaw I catalogue all known UK law blogs (plus a small number of notable overseas blawgs and blawg directory sites). Currently there are 132 listings (125 UK law blogs). More than half of these are hosted by Google's Blogger: 57 resolve to blogspot.com, 8 to wordpress.com and 8 to typepad.com; the remainder resolve to 57 other unique domains, though a number of these are nevertheless hosted by one of the big three blog services.

And the trends per Nick.

• New law blogs appear at a steady rate - no great rush, but no significant falling-off either.
• Those who have been blogging for a while are posting slightly less frequently.
• Lawyers are tending to focus more on their core interests, with less posting about peripheral topics and less navel gazing.
• For many, blogging is largely about self-satisfaction: getting it off their chest, stirring it up, getting feedback, learning from others.
• Some use it more directly to promote their expertise and engage potential clients and associates.

As to future, Nick sees UK law blogs continuing to grow and blog-like functions increasingly incorporated into all websites. "Whatever your purpose, blogging is a form of networking, putting you in touch with new people, sharing new information and insights and (if you do it right) earning you kudos and new business."