Blogs and Law Practice
posted by Frank Pasquale
Blogger extraordinaire Tom Bell has a rather skeptical take on the impact of blogs on legal practice. Bell notes that while
Blogs seem tailor-made to [offer a] cheap and easy way to bloviate before the world without suffering an editor’s interference . . . . Attorneys will not find that blogs gives them the sort of detailed and applied legal analysis they need to help their clients, nor will attorneys find they can ethically practice law via blogging.
Some valid points here–I certainly wouldn’t practice via blog! But there are some notable exceptions to Bell’s first point, about lack of careful legal analysis. As Ian Best’s taxonomy of blogs (and citation tracking) shows, some courts have used blogs to help them sort through cutting edge legal topics. I also think that law student blogs (done well!) may be a good way for students to develop their interests and demonstrate their abilities.
Moreover, the use of blogs as marketing seems to be catching on among practicing lawyers. The New Jersey Lawyer reports that law firm Stark & Stark launched two blogs that got over 250,000 hits in a year from 60,000 people; a partner at Hill Wallack says that his blog “usually generates at least one new referral daily.” (Sorry, it’s the 8/28 edition, so no article link.).
If they turn out to be a cheap, effective marketing tool, blogs may be a way for small-to-midsize firms to break into areas traditionally dominated by BigLaw.
October 19, 2006 at 12:55 pm
Posted in: Blogging
Print This Post
Responses (5)
NJLS - October 19, 2006 at 1:38 pm
Two additional notes to the practical value of law blogs.
1. Blogs* operated by law school Law Reviews offer practitioners an easy way to reach out to student authors. This would be useful if, for instance, a student comment outlined a cause of action for a class of potential litigants. A practitioner could, via a law review web forum, begin a conversation that could elicit critical research data that might save the attorney hundreds of hours and either support or rule out a contemplated lawsuit.
* Law review web forums tend to look less like a traditional blog, see Harvard’s Forum, U. Penn.’s PENNumbra, and Yale’s Pocketpart, but the notion of an online conversation is fundamentally the same.
2.) A drawback, which I have unfortunately seen in responses to several postings on this site (and most certainly others), are the ad hominem attacks that are (hopefully?) motivated by a desire to be witty, pithy, and sensationalist (as opposed to mean-spirited, condescending). I fear that this trend in conversation deters some authors from engaging in blogversations, and encourages others to gloss over details (which is, in any practical setting, what is more important) in an effort to be provocative.
BTD_Venkat - October 19, 2006 at 1:57 pm
Very interesting. The pressure of billable work today precludes me from offering a meaningful comment, but let me say that the availability online of rulings and commentary (see, e.g., How Appealing) has made me 10 times more informed as a lawyer. Both on topics outside my practice area and in the practice area. I can’t say it’s fundamentally altered the way I practice but it’s certainly made information much more accessible. More than once I have come across a case discussed on a blog. Later a related issue comes up in practice and 4-5 google searches later I have printed up a recent appellate decision addressing the issue, some briefs (sometimes helpful sometimes not), and scholarly commentary (a blog post and linked article). I would previously do this with Lexis/West but I would always spend some amount of time getting to the reference points. Because of blawgging, I have come across and remember many of these reference points already.
Some of it is generational of course. Most practicioners used to read slip notes and newsletter updates and kept informed through this. For whatever reason I never got into that. (At a small firm where I am now it’s much more difficult resource-wise to subscribe to newsletters, etc.) Blogs pretty much take the place of that and in a very effective efficient way.
Another change is that it allows lawyers to connect. Particularly at the small/solo level you don’t have a ready network of lawyers across the country. However, through blogging I have come across practicioners in various parts of the country and practice areas that I can at least email with an issue. This has resulted in more than one meaningful connection.
wheeler - October 19, 2006 at 1:59 pm
“Attorneys will not find that blogs gives them the sort of detailed and applied legal analysis they need to help their clients.”
debatable, but i’ll concede it. even so blogs do a much better job than, oh say a cle or state bar journal, at keepinig me up on the latest legal developments. i would feel like i was lost in the darkness without doug berman, how appealing, and scotus blog.
Carolyn Elefant - October 20, 2006 at 10:06 am
I would have to agree with the commenters that blogs DO help attorneys stay informed. I started my energy regulatory practice in 1993, and back then, the only way to keep on top on developments was to purchase a daily publication at a cost of $1500/year – at that time, well out of my price range. To read the news, I would have to go to either the FERC or trade association library and read a month’s worth of back issues at a time. These days, there are a couple of blogs on energy regulatory issues that are free, and link to the cases as well. This is an enormous sea change that people who do not practice, or have not practiced law as long as I have, simply cannot see.
Frank - October 20, 2006 at 11:25 am
THanks for all for the comments. It’s very interesting to see the “leveling effect” of blogs.
In response to Ms. Elefant’s point–it would be nice to compare the relative merits of the daily publication and the blog. My guess would be that the daily publication would be a bit more comprehensive and careful, but the blogs in the area would include more (potentially speculative) analysis and would be more interesting to read. There was some comparison in Science of wikipedia and Encyclopedia Brittanica, and apparently the open source model of the latter did quite well in comparison with the established information provider.
Leave a Reply