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

advertise-here4


Slip Opinions


Groundhog Day. (fp)

Banned in Tucson. (kw)

The Best and Worst of 2011 in Race and Law (kw)

Tortured to death for trespassing. (fp)

Drones of contention. (fp)

DOJ still coddling banks. (fp)

Creative destruction? Thank banks. (fp)

Blog about a new book, on how to talk to little girls--stressing smarts not cutes.   LAC

Macey on the heroic Rakoff. (fp)

Captured NY Fed. (fp)


solicitors

Our Podcast

Subscribe to Law Talk

law-rev-contents2.jpg


  • Posts by Author

  • Categories

  • Archives


  • Recent Comments


    • feathered_head on Physical Punishment and Parental Rights

    • Concernicus on Physical Punishment and Parental Rights

    • Ian on Physical Punishment and Parental Rights

    • Peterk on Physical Punishment and Parental Rights

    • Robert on Physical Punishment and Parental Rights

    • Three Oranges on Physical Punishment and Parental Rights

    • Paul Robichaux on Physical Punishment and Parental Rights

    • JR on Physical Punishment and Parental Rights

    • Jan on Physical Punishment and Parental Rights

    • Mark on Physical Punishment and Parental Rights

    • Shag from Brookline on Omelets and Eggs

    • Shag from Brookline on Omelets and Eggs

    • Joe on What Exactly is Wrong With Polygamy?

    • Phil on What Exactly is Wrong With Polygamy?

    • Lee on Lifecycles and the Firm
  •  

    Site Meter

    About the Blog

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

    (Image: Wikicommons)

Best of Both Worlds: Now Online and In Print

posted by Danielle Citron

Of late, the academy has been wrestling with a number of publication trends, including the increasing prevalence of online writing.  Many question whether blogging counts for tenure.  Others debate the cachet of online journals. 

An exciting development has emerged, one that serves as a bridge between the past and the present: the publication of shorter works online that later appear in print.  For instance, the Washington University Law Review has just announced that in the fall, it will begin publishing concise scholarly pieces (approximately 2,500 words) online followed by publication in the print edition.  Authors get the benefit of the law review’s excellent editorial feedback (I speak from experience) and a chance to write scholarly commentary that can find an audience quickly (as compared to the print process). 

This allows scholars to enjoy the “best of both worlds.”  Academics get the benefits of blogging (quick access to an interested audience) yet with more space to develop their ideas.  They also enjoy publishing in an esteemed law review, which will generate more readers.  It may even demonstrate that such writing has a place in a junior academic’s scholarly portfolio.  Kudos–this is a valuable development for academic discourse.


 July 30, 2009 at 8:15 am   Posted in: Articles and Books, Current Events   Print This Post Print This Post

Responses (7)

  1. A.W. - July 30, 2009 at 9:19 am

    personally i think that the journals should increasingly just give their product away. maybe stuff it with adds like a newpaper article, and then say “you can only reproduce this with the adds” in the copyright release.

    The reason why i say this is that there shouldn’t be a firewall between the general public and the legal academy. we SHOULD be sharing our thoughts and ideas, both to inform the public and maybe even get a little feedback. Alot of ideas that sound great on paper wither in the face of real world experience.

    Indeed, i am sure Glenn Reynolds would be first to say a more “open-source” approach to academics generally is probablyl a good thing. That is you post it online, let not just your peers review it, but regular folks, too. you never know when a person might have a good point even if they don’t have the right “letters” after their name.

    For instance, imagine if Sotomayor posted her “wise latina” comment online back when she made it. maybe someone would have read it, and actually said, “you know what? that sounds pretty racist.” and maybe she would have realized this was a problem before she repeated it 5 or 6 times.

  2. Howard Wasserman - July 30, 2009 at 10:23 am

    Interesting. Do you know where the announcement is? I could not find it on the WUSL home page.

    This, of course, is one journal doing, on its own, what several journals are doing as the “Legal Workshop” (http://legalworkshop.org/). The more interesting thing to me remains how we are going to treat short, original, on-line only pieces.

  3. Danielle Citron - July 30, 2009 at 10:40 am

    Howard, I am sure the announcement is coming soon. I received an email from the editor of new commentary publishing about it. Yes, and it will be interesting to see the academy respond to stand alone online work over time. Thanks A.W. and Howard for the comments.

  4. Anon - July 30, 2009 at 11:05 am

    This doesn’t really address the fundamental problem for law journals – the print subscription market is drying up (especially among law firms) and even the main law reviews at top schools are increasingly finding themselves unable to remain financially self-sufficient without substantial endowment or other revenues (e.g., ads or the Blue Book, which are both at risk from on-line competitors too). This could go two possible ways: (1) Some top journal is going to go all electronic and then the wall will topple and all journals will follow, or (2) Law schools will increase their subsidy of journals (beyond the free rent and overhead they now provide) and increasingly exert more control over those journals, via changes to board and member selection criteria and timing, oversight on article selection, etc. Neither path seems like the end of the world and both have some advantages. The problem of speed of publication vis-a-vis blogs and other electronic media really pales in comparison to the financial difficulty already hitting many journals.

  5. A.W. - July 30, 2009 at 11:12 am

    Danielle,

    For the record, my rate of typos decrease hourly. So at 9:19 a.m. the typo fairy was sprinkling her dust all over my comment. lol

    Still, my apologies.

  6. Tenrou Ugetsu - July 30, 2009 at 3:14 pm

    I was curious about the announcement, too. I was combing through WUSL and couldn’t find anything. I suppose I’ll just have to wait…

  7. Danielle Citron - July 31, 2009 at 6:35 am

    I bet that we hear more from WULR soon as I received the heads-up email from the Commentary editor yesterday. It is a new initiative and I am so glad that readers are interested. Yes, it will be so interesting to see if, or when, journals move their publication online. I remain a fan of print, perhaps because I love being surrounded by books and newspapers (my age is showing here). But I also appreciate online writing immensely so it strikes me as brilliant to wed the two, at least until we can get on board the cyberspace writing express in a more robust way. The market forces here are indeed a concern, as Anon astutely notes. So it is a wait and see, I suppose. And AW no worries about the typos, I didn’t notice! Thanks all, Danielle

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

Derek Bambauer
Gabriella Coleman
andré douglas pond cummings
David Gray
Brishen Rogers
Joseph Turow
Elizabeth A. Wilson













Previous Guests

Michael Abramowicz
Michelle Adams
Robert Ahdieh
Marvin Ammori
Michelle Anderson
Laura Appleman
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
Al Brophy
Neil H. Buchanan
Bill Burke-White
Scott Burris
Paul Butler
Ryan Calo
Naomi Cahn
Anupam Chander
Miriam Cherry
Jack Chin
Glenn Cohen
Jennifer Collins
Caroline Mala Corbin
Thomas Crocker
Allison Danner
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
Michael Froomkin
Amanda Frost
Brian Frye
Timothy Glynn
Rachel Godsil
Eric Goldman
Kyle Graham
David Gray
Craig Green
Tristin Green
Jonathan Hafetz
Meredith Harbach
Michelle Harner
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
Kevin Noble Maillard
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
Michael J. Pitts
Marc Poirier
David Post
Amanda Pustilnik
Shruti Rana
Geoffrey Rapp
Neil Richards
Lori Ringhand
Alice Ristroph
Marc Roark
Sasha Romanosky
Tuan Samahon
Susan Scafidi
David Schraub
Paul Secunda
Jonathan Siegel
Jessica Silbey
Peter Smith
Judd Sneirson
Adam Steinman
Charles Sullivan
Rick Swedloff
Olivier Sylvain
Steph Tai
Andrew Taslitz
Robert Tsai
Jenia Turner
Steve Vladeck
Ari Waldman
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
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
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