During BloggerCon, Day 2, Eugene Volokh moderated a session on "Weblogs and Law" during which he talked about ... the law of weblogging. He also commented on the motivations of lawyers to blog. Economically, its not directly worthwhile ... its rare that a weblog generates enough traffic to cover the bandwidth cost, even if the views were monetized. So why do lawyers blog, when their time is scarce and expensive? Prof. Volokh explains that many law blogs are actually "Prof Blogs" written by professors or folks with a professorial behavior pattern that is not economically motivated. See (Profbloggers at the Volokh Conspiracy.
Posted by dougsimpson at October 6, 2003 03:31 PM | TrackBackIt's a fair question. My current answer is that as a practicing attorney, one is required to do professional reading anyway. E.g., R.P.C. 1.1, and the comment on "Maintaining Competence." Might as well keep a blog while doing so. In my view that sort of blogging is not substantially different from reading and contributing to the newsletter of a bar section or group, or contributing to a law firm newsletter or website. I would guess that for most lawyers, none of those activities have any measurable direct economic return either.
Dave, we think alike. After completing a 25-year career in a large corporate law department, I turned to re-developing my scholarship, service and scholarly writing at a level more appropriate to university level teaching (my current career target). My blog is at one time an external brain and searchable memory bank, a magnet for comments, a source of contact with like minds, and an exercise in objective analysis and writing. Knowing someone better informed may be reading my posts makes me think beforehand.
Posted by: Doug Simpson at October 6, 2003 07:22 PMGreat comments guys. Peter FDA
Posted by: Peter at November 11, 2003 01:58 AMnice to meet
Posted by: Bali at December 18, 2003 02:04 AM