Home | About | RSS Feed | Contact and Publicity Guidelines | Comment Policy the Law, the Universe, and Everything 

advertise-here4


Slip Opinions


Follow Concurring Opinions on Twitter (DJS)

If you're interested, you can now follow me on Twitter (DJS)

Fraud!!! (kw)

Don't pre-tweet your verdict (kw)

You can do very well as the owner of a very bad baseball team.  Monopolies work! [DAH]

WSJ animated graphic on Google's quest to know everything (DJS)

Nine amazing bookstores (DJS)

Market-oriented scholar concludes "Wall Street was (and remains) a giant government-sanctioned Ponzi scheme." (fp)

A heartwarming story of financial innovation. (fp)

A real jobs plan. (fp)

Our Podcast

Subscribe to Law Talk

law-rev-contents2.jpg


  • Posts by Author

  • Categories

  • Archives


  • Recent Comments


    • abid masih on Surgical Strike on Social Suffering

    • TheBigLieSociety on Online Symposium: Zittrain's The Future of the Internet--And How To Stop It

    • TheBigLieSociety on BRIGHT IDEAS: Laura DeNardis on Protocol Politics

    • TheBigLieSociety on Future of the Internet Symposium: The Role of Infrastructure Management in Determining Internet Freedom

    • James Grimmelmann on Future of the Internet Symposium: The Right Theory

    • Seth Finkelstein on Future of the Internet Symposium: An Iron Cage for the iPhone Age

    • A.J. Sutter on Future of the Internet Symposium: The Right Theory

    • Frank Pasquale on Future of the Internet Symposium: An Iron Cage for the iPhone Age

    • Jason Treit on Future of the Internet Symposium: Does anyone care about the 'rule of law'?

    • Daithi Mac Sithigh on Future of the Internet Symposium: Do We Know the Future of the Internet?

    • Seth Finkelstein on Future of the Internet Symposium: An Iron Cage for the iPhone Age

    • Joel Reidenberg on Future of the Internet Symposium: Does anyone care about the 'rule of law'?

    • Ryan Calo on Future of the Internet Symposium: (Im)Perfect Enforcement

    • Jamie on Future of the Internet Symposium: The Difficulty in Identifying Open v. Closed Systems

    • Ken Arromdee on Reputation bankruptcy
  •  

    Site Meter

    About the Blog

    Concurring Opinions is a multiple authored, general interest legal blog.

    (Image: Wikicommons)

The Harvard Bloggership Conference in a Nutshell

posted by Daniel Solove

harvardlawschool.jpgI have returned from the bloggership conference at Harvard Law School. This conference has already been blogged about (big surprise), with Ann Althouse and Larry Solum live-blogging it and Michael Froomkin, in grand meta fashion, blogging about those blogging about the conference.

I thought I’d contribute to all this blogging by translating the conference into “blog” (the punchy to-the-point language of blogging). You can get everything you need to know about the conference from this post — absolutely free of charge. It’s as if you had gone to the conference yourself — only better, because I’ve saved you hours of time and engaged in extensive analysis to bring you the key points. [Warning: The summaries below are caricatures. Plenty of more serious commentary about the conference has already been done -- see the links above and below.]

INTRODUCTION:

Paul Caron: “Who are we? Why are we here?” Answer: we’re bloggers, and we’re great. [And we're here because of the free grub at Harvard.]

PANEL 1:

Doug Berman: Blogging brings us to the people; it is less hierarchical than normal scholarship — and it’s fun.

Larry Solum: Blogs are short, open source, and without mediation.

Kate Litvak: Blogging is akin to a “bugged water cooler” conversation; we should get a grip because blogging ain’t that revolutionary.

Paul Butler: The blog “is slapping legal scholarship in the face” and it brings power to the people.

Jim Lindgren: Why should we want to know whether blogging is scholarship?

Ellen Podgor: Everybody is right.

PANEL 2:

Gail Heriot: Blogging is fun and makes the academy less cloistered; 40% of law review articles never get cited — not even by their own authors — ouch!

Orin Kerr: The problem with blogs is tyranny — yes, tyranny — which is the result of the fact blogs are in reverse chronological order rather than focused around the best and most lasting posts.

Gordon Smith: Blogs connect you into the network.

Randy Barnett: Blogging can seduce you away from scholarship [don't be seduced to the dark side young Skywalker], but blogging can help advertise your stuff.

Michael Froomkin: We should blog more about law review articles we like. [But can we find enough?]

More below the fold.


PANEL 3:

Glenn Reynolds: Bloggers are not likely to be sued for libel [because they're mostly poor schmos], but that might change.

Eugene Volokh: Many laws protect free speech above and beyond the First Amendment.

Eric Goldman: Bloggers should be afraid . . . very afraid — co-bloggers can be liable for each other’s posts. [In other words, don't trust your co-bloggers -- got that Kaimi, Dave, and Dan?]

Besty Malloy: The law must do a better job protecting anonymous speech.

Daniel Solove: We have a romantic conception of the blogger, envisioning someone like Eugene Volokh, when many bloggers may be more akin to Jessica Cutler who blogged about her sex life. [Solove had so many profound things to say, but unfortunately, I wasn't paying much attention.]

PANEL 4:

Larry Ribstein: Blogging can help you be a public intellectual.

Ann Althouse: Stop asking questions; stop making rules; just blog.

Christine Hurt: Blogging without tenure has some risks, but they are outweighed by the great benefits, such as networking and getting known in the academy. [You might not get tenure, but you'll know a lot of people with tenure who will feel sympathy for you.]

Howard Bashman: Blogs are great publicity.

Peter Lattman: Journalists read and learn from blogs.

CONCLUSION:

Charles Nesson: Ok, get the hell out of here and crawl back into your caves. . .

And that’s a wrap. It was great to meet bloggers in person rather than in pixel. It was an interesting conference, although there were no paradigm-altering insights. Nobody is prepared to give up writing law review articles in lieu of blogging, although Orin Kerr resolved to write only 18 articles per year rather than 20 to make time for his blogging.

Basically, here’s what we learned:

1. Law review articles are long; blog posts are short.

2. Blogging is fun.

3. Blogging can be scholarly, except when it’s not.

Conference papers are here.

UPDATE: Beyond the live blogging linked to above, there are a lot of good recaps about the conference sprouting up around the blogosphere. If you want a more serious discussion about what people said (beyond my silly caricatures), be sure to check out Roger Alford’s terrific compendium of quotable quotes; Doug Berman’s historical reflections on the conference; Eric Goldman’s thoughtful recap; Orin Kerr’s reply to Larry Solum’s critique of his talk; Tim Armstrong’s very detailed summary of the conference presentations; and Michael Froomkin’s comprehensive collection of links to discussions about the conference.

Finally, I want to note that in all seriousness, this was a terrific and interesting conference. Paul Caron deserves a round of applause for bringing us together to reflect upon the role of blogs in legal scholarship. It is definitely very worthwhile to take time to think about what we have been doing and how we should be blogging in the days to come.


 April 29, 2006 at 12:05 am   Posted in: Blogging, Conferences, Law School   Print This Post Print This Post

Responses (4)

  1. Kevin OKeefe - April 30, 2006 at 7:14 pm

    Thanks for the effort Dan. Great value for those of us unable to attend.

  2. IKE IZENBERG - May 5, 2006 at 10:20 pm

    Well, this conference, seemingly silly, is a breath of fresh air.

    Aside from the special use to which bloggery has

    been treated at this conference, web log publishing has within a few short months become a powerful alternate form of mass communication.

    The quality of many blogs centering on poltics, for example exceeds the quality and scope of the paper press.

    WATCHA THINK?

    Regards,

    Ike

  3. Diego Sanchez - May 6, 2006 at 5:14 pm

    Los felicitamos por los post de la conferencia de las bitácoras en Havard.

    Saludos desde América Latina.

  4. Blogging and legal academics « Australian Technology and IP Business - February 24, 2010 at 3:11 pm

    [...] Opinions provided a wrap-up. (via Blawg Review) Posted 2nd May 2006 by David Jacobson in Legal, Web/Tech, [...]

Leave a Reply

Spam protection by WP Captcha-Free


  • « Previous post
  • Next post »

Authors

Daniel J. Solove
Kaimipono Wenger
Dave Hoffman
Nate Oman
Frank Pasquale
Deven Desai
Danielle Citron
Lawrence Cunningham
Sarah Waldeck
Jaya Ramji-Nogales
Solangel Maldonado
Gerard Magliocca

Guests

Brandon Bartels
Glenn Cohen
Meredith Harbach
Jeff Jonas
Michael Kang
Alicia Kelly




Need A Solicitor?
Find the right solicitor to advise you on all your litigation law, employment law, divorce law and family law related matters. Use the award winning legal search and matching service from TakeLegalAdvice.com









Previous Guests

Michael Abramowicz
Michelle Adams
Robert Ahdieh
Michelle Anderson
Laura Appleman
Ann Bartow
Adam Benforado
Gaia Bernstein
Francesca Bignami
Jeremy Blumenthal
Kathleen Boozang
Bruce Boyden
Donald Braman
Al Brophy
Neil H. Buchanan
Bill Burke-White
Scott Burris
Paul Butler
Naomi Cahn
Anupam Chander
Miriam Cherry
Jack Chin
Jennifer Collins
Thomas Crocker
Allison Danner
Brannon Denning
Deven Desai
Mike Dimino
Mark Edwards
David Fagundes
Lisa Fairfax
Christine Haight Farley
Kim Ferzan
Dan Filler
Michael Froomkin
Amanda Frost
Timothy Glynn
Rachel Godsil
Eric Goldman
David Gray
Craig Green
Tristin Green
Michelle Harner
Jeffrey Harrison
Erica Hashimoto
Carissa Hessick
Laura Heymann
Robert Hillman
Christine Hurt
Darian Ibrahim
Sherrilyn Ifill
John Ip
Kevin Johnson
Kristin Johnson
Dan Kahan
Jeffrey Kahn
Brian Kalt
Sam Kamin
Michael Kang
Chimène Keitner
Orin Kerr
Nancy Kim
Heidi Kitrosser
Adam Kolber
Russell Korobkin
Alex Kreit
Anita S. Krishnakumar
Susan Kuo
Greg Lastowka
Sarah Lawsky
Youngjae Lee
Erik Lillquist
Jeff Lipshaw
Jonathan Lipson
Jacqueline Lipton
Joseph Liu
Michael Madison
Solangel Maldonado
Jason Mazzone
Linda McClain
William McGeveran
Salil Mehra
Carrie Menkel-Meadow
Max Minzner
Viva Moffat
Scott Moss
Eric Muller
Jaya Ramji-Nogales
Helen Norton
Elizabeth Nowicki
Paul Ohm
Angela Onwuachi-Willing
Michael O'Shea
David Opderback
Kristen Osenga
Rafael Pardo
Marcy Peek
Eduardo Peñalver
Robert Percival
Marc Poirier
David Post
Shruti Rana
Geoffrey Rapp
Neil Richards
Lori Ringhand
Alice Ristroph
Tuan Samahon
Susan Scafidi
Paul Secunda
Jonathan Siegel
Jessica Silbey
Peter Smith
Judd Sneirson
Adam Steinman
Charles Sullivan
Rick Swedloff
Steph Tai
Andrew Taslitz
Robert Tsai
Jenia Turner
Steve Vladeck
Spencer Weber Waller
Howard Wasserman
Melissa Waters
Frank Wu
Alfred Yen
Corey Yung
David Zaring
Timothy Zick
Michael Zimmer
Jonathan Zittrain

Ownership

Concurring Opinions is a
general-interest legal blog
operated by Concurring
Opinions LLC, a Pennsylvania
Limited Liability Corporation.

Blogroll

Above the Law
ACS Blog
Althouse
Balkinization
Becker-Posner Blog
BlackProf
BoingBoing
Chicago Law Faculty Blog
Conglomerate
CrimLaw
Crime & Federalism
CrimProf Blog
Crooked Timber
Derechoalderecho
Discourse.net
Dorf on Law
Election Law
Emergent Chaos
The Faculty Lounge
Feminist Law Profs
43(B)log
Freakonomics Blog
Freedom to Tinker
Google Blogoscoped
How Appealing
Ideoblog
Info/Law
Instapundit.com
Juris Novus
Jurisdynamics
Just Books
Law and Humanities Blog
Law and Letters
Law Librarian Blog
Legal Profession Blog
Legal Theory Blog
Legal Times Blog
Leiter Reports
Brian Leiter's Law School Reports
Lessig Blog
Madisonian Theory
Media Law Blog
Mirror of Justice
The Moderate Voice
National Security Advisors
Opinio Juris
Point of Law
PrawfsBlawg
ProfessorBainbridge.com
Property Prof Blog
Red Tape Chronicles
The Right Coast
Schneier on Security
SCOTUSBlog
Security Dilemmas
Sentencing Law and Policy
Simple Justice
Sivacracy.net
The Situationist
Susan Crawford
TalkLeft
Talking Points Memo
TaxProf Blog
Tech & Marketing Law
Truth on the Market
Volokh Conspiracy
WorkPlace Prof Blog
WSJ Law Blog
Wonkette
The Yin Blog


© Concurring Opinions

Powered by WordPress