Lawyers & legal professionals speak : Law Blog is still needed with Twitter
Despite Twitter proving to be a very effective client development tool for lawyers, I shared 7 reasons why a lawyer still needed a blog. I also asked legal professionals on Twitter why they thought a blog was still needed even though the lawyers were using Twitter.
Here's the response from legal professionals around the globe on why a law blog is still needed.
- Delaware business litigation lawyer Francis Pileggi (@fpileggi): easy to search one's body of work.
- Emma Lee, marketing assistant at London's Lawson West LLP (@Emma_Lee1) Twitter's here today and over by tomorrow. A blog builds authority and brand.
- Connecticut employment lawyer Dan Schwartz (@ctemplawyer): Because most people don't have a clue about Twitter; it's tough enough for them to understand a blog.
- Kitsap County, WA lawyer Sara Lingafelter (@theclimbergirl) Still need a quality, keyword rich blog to draw search engine traffic. + the masses are coming to twitter but aren't here yet.
- Ontario, Canada business lawyer David Canton (@davidcanton): Because a blog has more substance, is more personal, less fleeting, a better long term resource, & you can't say much in 140 c.
- Richard Wood, accounting manager at Seattle's Summit Law Group (@woodi68): Keeping a blog is still critical. Twitter is fine for merely sharing other content, but difficult to create original content.
- International law marketer Lance Godard (@lancegodard): Tweets create desire, blogs satisfy it. Ex: u can read @guykawasaki ppt on innovation, but watching him give it completely diff.
- UK law librarian/information officer James Mullan (@jimmy1712): solicitors still blog because the medium suits them e.g. sitting down and carefully drafting something.
- Mike McBride, Ohio blogger and litigation support specialist, (@mikemac29): If Twitter ever goes under, what are you w/o your own blog? AND Twitter is not "you", it can be part of your online presence but it's not a home, and blog for more than 140 chars...
- Dallas business and employment dispute lawyer Rob Radcliff (@robradcliff): 140 characters is not sufficient to address legal developments important to clients or serve as a client resource.
- Milwaukee trial lawyer and jury consultant Anne Reed (@annereed): (1) Twitter conversation itself churns up thoughts that seem to need more than 140 characters. So, as in yesterday's post, I sometimes blog *because* of Twitter.
- New York Intellectual property attorney Kelly Talcott (@kdtalcott): Tweets are the icing. The blog's the cake. You need both to offer something your readers will digest.
- Chicago intellectual property lawyer Evan Brown: (@internetcases) Writing 140 characters at a time has its virtues but sometimes issues need thorough treatment. That's where blogs still fit in.
- Seattle construction attorney Doug Reiser (@DouglasReiser): twitter is a persistent conversation between a community - a dialogue. blogging is a presentation of select ideas for others.
- Jason Milch, vice president of public relations for Chicago firm Jaffe Associates, (@jasonmilch): simply, because not every subject can be explored in appropriate detail in only 140 chars. Too obvious?
- Landon Harlan, Obu Internet Marketing, (@landonharlan): People hire lawyers for their opinions, legal or otherwise, and a blog allows the lawyer to communicate more personally.
- Iowa business lawyer Rush Nigut (@RushNigut): Because expertise is not demonstrated in 140 characters.
- Lee Stranahan, writer, artist and filmaker, (@Stranahan): I think blogs still have a place...and how well can lawyers really navigate in 140 characters?
- Matt Fankhauser, Salt Lake City law firm marketing director (@MattFankhauser): To create enough content to be found by clients that is easy to get to via search or typing in a web address, without a login.
- Texas appellate lawyer Todd Smith (@dtoddsmith): Twitter conversations occur on level that's not possible with blogs. You trade the character limit for instant interaction.
- @averageatty, who blogs at 'a blawg for the rest of us': not everything can be expressed in 140 characters or less.
