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.

In exchanging notes about his comment on my AmLaw 200 post, Ken Adams, publisher of AdamsDrafting mentioned another of his blog experiments.

A couple of days ago I posted an item asking for volunteers to proofread portions of the manuscript of the second edition of A Manual of Style for Contract Drafting. So far over two dozen people have responded. I had two reasons for doing this. First, I'd like some fresher eyeballs to look at stuff that I've read umpteen times, and I've learned that you can't expect publishers these days to devote resources to copyediting. Also, I thought some of my readers would enjoy it and that it would give me a new way to engage with them......[T]he book has benefited from comments and leads offered by my readers. Having them pitch in with proofreading is just an extension of that.

The number of times I've received help from readers is more than I can count. Whether getting info for a post I was working on, getting hard copies of news stories, locating a contact, getting insider tips, or setting up meetings during my travels, you guys have been fabulous.

What are some things readers of your blog have done for you?