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


advertise-here4


Slip Opinions


Most under-appreciated thing about Warren Buffett: he built Berkshire to last well beyond him.  (LAC, at BRK annual meeting via Motley Fool, here.)

University governance as a new topic of public discussion.

An unusual profile of Mary Anne Franks (kw)

Aggressive copyright litigation run amok. (fp)

USA Today's Matt Krantz quoting me on Warren Buffett joining Twitter.  (LAC)

Private prisons? Why, sure! What could possibly go wrong? (kw)

TNR profiles Susan Crawford (kw)

Berkshire Hathaway is bigger than Warren Buffett.  Manual of Ideas (LAC).

Guns don't shoot people, kitchen appliances shoot people (kw)

Via Glom, Sat Eve Post review of The Essays of Warren Buffett.


Our Podcast

Subscribe to Law Talk


  • Posts by Author

  • Categories

  • Archives


  • Recent Comments


    • Kyle on Contract Evolution

    • Bruce Boyden on Tumblr, Porn, and Internet Intermediaries

    • Orin Kerr on The Varying Use of Legal Scholarship by the U.S. Supreme Court across Issues

    • Guy Spier on Symposium Redux: Essays and Lessons

    • John Mihaljevic on Is Berkshire Hathaway Really a Psychology Experiment?

    • Sy Lorne on The Many Audiences of Buffett's Letters

    • Lawrence Cunningham on The Skeptical Principal

    • Lawrence Cunningham on Berkshire's Dividend Policy: Part II

    • Lawrence Cunningham on The Many Audiences of Buffett's Letters

    • Lawrence Cunningham on Deals without Bankers: Salomon and Benjamin Moore

    • Brett Bellmore on National Referenda

    • Gerard Magliocca on National Referenda

    • mls on National Referenda

    • David Schwartz on The Varying Use of Legal Scholarship by the U.S. Supreme Court across Issues

    • Patrick S. O'Donnell on Warren Buffett: Practical Philosopher of Capitalism
  •  

    Site Meter

    About the Blog

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

    (Image: Wikicommons)

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

Spam protection by WP Captcha-Free


  • « Previous post
  • Next post »

Authors

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

Guests

Kelli A. Alces
Taunya Lovell Banks
Ryan Calo
Claire Hill
Jay Kesten
William McGeveran
Meredith Render
Aaron Saiger
David L. Schwartz
Olivier Sylvain
Charles K. Whitehead
Aaron Zelinsky


















Previous Guests

Michael Abramowicz
Michelle Adams
Robert Ahdieh
Marvin Ammori
Michelle Anderson
Laura Appleman
Derek Bambauer
Taunya Lovell Banks
Ann Bartow
Steven Bellovin
Adam Benforado
Gaia Bernstein
Francesca Bignami
Josh Blackman
Joseph Blocher
Jeremy Blumenthal
Kathleen Boozang
Bruce Boyden
Donald Braman
Khiara Bridges
Al Brophy
Neil H. Buchanan
Bill Burke-White
Scott Burris
Paul Butler
Ryan Calo
Naomi Cahn
Anupam Chander
Miriam Cherry
Jack Chin
Glenn Cohen
Gabriella Coleman
Jennifer Collins
Caroline Mala Corbin
Thomas Crocker
andré douglas pond cummings
Allison Danner
Laura DeNardis
Brannon Denning
Deven Desai
Mike Dimino
Mark Edwards
Maxine Eichner
Jessica Erickson
David Fagundes
Lisa Fairfax
Joshua Fairfield
Christine Haight Farley
Kim Ferzan
Dan Filler
Mary Anne Franks
Susan Freiwald
Michael Froomkin
Amanda Frost
Brian Frye
Timothy Glynn
Rachel Godsil
Eric Goldman
Kyle Graham
David Gray
Craig Green
Tristin Green
Jonathan Hafetz
Vivian E. Hamilton
Meredith Harbach
Michelle Harner
Angela Harris
Jeffrey Harrison
Hosea Harvey
Erica Hashimoto
Jennifer Hendricks
Carissa Hessick
Laura Heymann
Robert Hillman
Gilbert A. Holmes
Nicole Huberfeld
Christine Hurt
Darian Ibrahim
Sherrilyn Ifill
John Ip
Shavar Jeffries
Kevin Johnson
Kristin Johnson
Jeff Jonas
Courtney Joslin
Dan Kahan
Jeffrey Kahn
Brian Kalt
Sam Kamin
Michael Kang
Chimène Keitner
Alicia Kelly
Orin Kerr
Nancy Kim
Heidi Kitrosser
Adam Kolber
Russell Korobkin
Alex Kreit
Anita S. Krishnakumar
Susan Kuo
Greg Lastowka
Sarah Lawsky
Youngjae Lee
Margaret Lewis
Erik Lillquist
Jeff Lipshaw
Jonathan Lipson
Jacqueline Lipton
Matthew Lister
Joseph Liu
Michael Madison
Tayyab Mahmud
Kevin Noble Maillard
Solangel Maldonado
Jason Mazzone
Linda McClain
William McGeveran
Salil Mehra
Carrie Menkel-Meadow
Max Minzner
Viva Moffat
Scott Moss
Eric Muller
Janai Nelson
Jaya Ramji-Nogales
Helen Norton
Elizabeth Nowicki
Paul Ohm
Angela Onwuachi-Willing
David Opderback
David Orentlicher
Michael O'Shea
Kristen Osenga
Mary-Rose Papandrea
Rafael Pardo
Marcy Peek
Eduardo Peñalver
Robert Percival
Michael J. Pitts
Marc Poirier
David Post
Amanda Pustilnik
Shruti Rana
Geoffrey Rapp
William Reynolds
Neil Richards
Lori Ringhand
Alice Ristroph
Marc Roark
Brishen Rogers
Sasha Romanosky
Tuan Samahon
Susan Scafidi
David Schleicher
David Schraub
Paul Secunda
Lea Shaver
Jonathan Siegel
Jessica Silbey
Peter Smith
Judd Sneirson
Adam Steinman
Charles Sullivan
Rick Swedloff
Peter Swire
Olivier Sylvain
Steph Tai
Andrew Taslitz
Robert Tsai
Jenia Turner
Joseph Turow
Steve Vladeck
Ari Waldman
Spencer Weber Waller
Howard Wasserman
Melissa Waters
Elizabeth A. Wilson
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
Access to Justice
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
Privacy and Security Training
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
TeachPrivacy 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