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

Search


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

jr_114_9780195367195_bnr

jr_114_9780195383768_bnr

advertise-here4


FC-CO(SS)

Our Podcast

Subscribe to Law Talk

law-rev-contents2.jpg


  • Posts by Author

  • Categories

  • Archives


  • Recent Comments

    • Observer on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • RJ on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • RJ on Ricci and Briscoe as Disparate Impact Cases

    • Mike Rich on Negligent Corpse Mishandling

    • anon on Privacy and Tattletales

    • orly lobel on At CELS, Hoping to Blog

    • harry brooks on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • RJ on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • Michael H Schneider on Negligent Corpse Mishandling

    • flood pictures on Public opinion on same-sex marriage

    • gtownstudent on And Justache For All at GW Law

    • AF on Ricci and Briscoe as Disparate Impact Cases

    • RJ on Ricci and Briscoe as Disparate Impact Cases

    • Maryland Conservatarian on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • Daniel S. Goldberg on Negligent Corpse Mishandling

  •  

    Site Meter

Blogs, Blogging, Blawging, and the New Scholar

posted by Rick Swedloff

Although this is the first time I have ever blogged or blawged, I have been reading blogs since 2001. I came to read blogs in the usual way: as a diversion during the work day. I started with some of the well-written personal blogs. After that, I moved on to some funny blogs or major blogs that provided new and interesting diversions. I found blawgs much later. Because I am neither funny nor have an interest in sharing the boring details of my daily existence, before starting down this academic path I never seriously considered blogging. Now I see it as a way to keep me writing more regularly and give me space to flesh out some unleavened ideas. These are not new ideas and I suspect that these reasons plus some idea about self-promotion are part of why many people blog. But I could be wrong.

If I were into memes or had the time on this blog to run an interview series, I would love to ask some questions from top academic bloggers. But I’m not and I don’t so I’ll post the questions here and hope to get some responses. My hope is that answers to these questions will help new scholars and blawgers think about how to use blawgs.

* Why do you blog?

* How do you structure your day to include time for blogging?

* If you post as frequently as Althouse or Leiter (and there are a lot of you out there), how do you find time to anything else?

* How many blogs do you read and do you use a feed?

* What is the connection between your scholarship and your blogging? Do you workshop new and quarter-baked ideas on your blog? Or do you keep potential article ideas away from the blog?

From the blogging perspective, I am also interested in the way in which incorporated blogs operate:

* How do folks split ad revenue to the extent that it exists (pro rata, based on number of posts, number of responses, amount of time)?

* When thinking about blog posts, do you consider whether they will generate more page views or comments?


 December 29, 2007 at 7:48 am   Posted in: Uncategorized   Print This Post Print This Post

Responses (3)

  1. Doug B. - December 30, 2007 at 8:19 am

    Rick: I indirectly answer many of these questions in this piece on blogging and scholarhsip: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=898174

  2. Frank - December 31, 2007 at 1:16 pm

    1. Why blog?:

    First, I am trying to get down research notes for future projects. It’s important to me to write something every day, and blogging gives me a chance to do that. Even if most of the posts don’t end up being published in a longer work, they at least focus me on something that is (I hope) of lasting interest. Second, the blog allows one to call attention to exemplarily good or bad academic work in law and the social sciences. We live in an era of information overload, and good blogs ideally filter it. Finally, blogging lets a professor keep in touch with various parts of the legal community. You have an audience who can give you fascinating perspectives on your teaching and writing.

    With many eyes, all bugs are shallow. Similarly, if a commenter calls me out for a bad argument, I can drop it or reconsider it eventually.

    2. Structure of day: No, blogging happens in the margins, usually inspired by reading something provocative.

    3: Blogs read: I follow about 100; I have SAGE readers on Firefox at home and work. If the first few sentences catch my attention, I’ll read a post. The only thing I read consistently, every day, is bookforum.com; not necessarily all the articles he links to, but I find at least one or two each day that are great.

    4: Maximizing pageviews: I really try not to think about this. To me, the whole joy of the blogosphere is that you are not pressured to keep to some formula of audience maximization that a profit-driven MSM must conform to.

  3. Daniel J. Solove - December 31, 2007 at 4:28 pm

    Why do you blog?

    Why not? It’s a fun way to stay engaged with current events and get instant feedback on my ideas and scholarship.

    I’ve also had some interesting online exchanges with Richard Epstein, William Stuntz, and others. I’ve had exchanges with others before in various scholarly papers, but the blogging exchanges have allowed for more immediate back-and-forth.

    How do you structure your day to include time for blogging?

    Good question. I don’t. I just blog whenever I get the itch. And I’ve figured out that the only way that Frank Pasquale can blog so much is that he secretly has a team of 100 staffers working for him.

    If you post as frequently as Althouse or Leiter (and there are a lot of you out there), how do you find time to anything else?

    I recall that somebody once said: “You can get a blog, or you can get a life.”

    How many blogs do you read and do you use a feed?

    Yes, I use a feed, but I also visit a number of my favorite blogs as well. I read about 10-20 blogs with regularity; and another 20-40 blogs on occasion.

    What is the connection between your scholarship and your blogging? Do you workshop new and quarter-baked ideas on your blog? Or do you keep potential article ideas away from the blog?

    I often blog about my scholarship both before and after. Several of my blog posts about online shaming and gossip became fodder for my book, The Future of Reputation, and some blog posts on data mining and the balance between liberty and security were worked into my forthcoming article, Data Mining and the Security-Liberty Debate, 74 U. Chicago Law Review (forthcoming 2008).

    After my scholarship comes out, I often like to blog about it. For example, I’ve responded to several book reviews and blog commentary about The Future of Reputation. I responded to Ann Bartow’s critique in Pennumbra of my article, A Taxonomy of Privacy.

    I also like being able to write short book reviews, such as this critique of Richard Posner’s Not a Suicide Pact and my recent review of Lawrence Friedman’s Guarding Life’s Dark Secrets.

    I often blog about topics and issues that I plan to write about at some point. I rarely telegraph that I plan to write a paper about a particular topic, but I do blog about issues that I’m intending to write about in the future.

    When thinking about blog posts, do you consider whether they will generate more page views or comments?

    I rarely blog about something because I think it will get page views. But I do think that there are different ways to write any particular blog post that might generate greater interest and comments. If I write a short provocative blog post that poses a question, it typically (though not always) will generate more comments than a lengthy expository blog post that doesn’t pose a question. Humor almost always generates more attention.

    I try not to let concern over audience response influence the topics I blog about, but I will try to write posts in a style that will be engaging to my audience.

Leave a Reply

*
To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture. Click on the picture to hear an audio file of the word.
Click to hear an audio file of the anti-spam word


  • « Previous post
  • Next post »

Authors

Daniel J. Solove

Website
Understanding Privacy

Kaimipono Wenger

Website
SSRN Page

Dave Hoffman

Website
SSRN Page

Nate Oman

Website
SSRN Page

Frank Pasquale

Website
SSRN Page

Deven Desai

Website
SSRN Page

Danielle Citron

Website
SSRN Page

Lawrence Cunningham

Website
SSRN Page

Sarah Waldeck

Website
SSRN Page

Jaya Ramji-Nogales

Website
SSRN Page

Solangel Maldonado

Website
SSRN Page

Gerard Magliocca

Website
SSRN Page


Guests

Rachel Godsil
Alex Kreit
Anita Krishnakumar
Matthew Sag
Michael Zimmer






Previous Guests

Michael Abramowicz
Michelle Adams
Robert Ahdieh
Michelle Anderson
Laura Appleman
Ann Bartow
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
Allison Danner
Brannon Denning
Deven Desai
Mike Dimino
Mark Edwards
David Fagundes
Christine Haight Farley
Kim Ferzan
Dan Filler
Michael Froomkin
Amanda Frost
Timothy Glynn
Rachel Godsil
Eric Goldman
David Gray
Craig Green
Tristin Green
Jeffrey Harrison
Erica Hashimoto
Carissa Hessick
Laura Heymann
Robert Hillman
Christine Hurt
Darian Ibrahim
John Ip
Kevin Johnson
Dan Kahan
Brian Kalt
Sam Kamin
Michael Kang
Chimène Keitner
Orin Kerr
Nancy Kim
Heidi Kitrosser
Adam Kolber
Russell Korobkin
Anita S. Krishnakumar
Susan Kuo
Greg Lastowka
Sarah Lawsky
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
Scott Moss
Eric Muller
Jaya Ramji-Nogales
Helen Norton
Elizabeth Nowicki
Paul Ohm
Michael O'Shea
David Opderback
Kristen Osenga
Rafael Pardo
Marcy Peek
Eduardo Peñalver
Robert Percival
David Post
Shruti Rana
Geoffrey Rapp
Neil Richards
Lori Ringhand
Alice Ristroph
Susan Scafidi
Paul Secunda
Jonathan Siegel
Jessica Silbey
Peter Smith
Charles Sullivan
Rick Swedloff
Steph Tai
Andrew Taslitz
Robert Tsai
Jenia Turner
Steve Vladeck
Sarah Waldeck
Melissa Waters
Alfred Yen
David Zaring
Timothy Zick
Spencer Weber Waller
Howard Wasserman
Frank Wu
Corey Yung
Jonathan Zittrain

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
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
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