This is something often colleagues asked me, since lawyers generally do not have enough time to write. This reminde me a very good article, from november 2004, entitled “What's the Use of this Weblog?” and posted by Evan Schaeffer (Legal Underground)
“….Why do I have a weblog—or more specifically, three weblogs? I’ve been thinking about that too, especially as I think about where Notes from the (Legal) Underground might be headed after almost a year of posting every day. Why keep it up? Generally speaking, lawyers don’t read weblogs. Though this seems to be changing as weblogs get more media attention, the reaction from lawyers who know both me and my weblogs is not always favorable. Some lawyers are openly hostile: Why am I wasting my time surfing the Internet? And why weblogs? They’re a fad. Few people read them, and those that do are mostly young girls. “
In his defense, the autor says that the weblogs have now generated a number of good clients; that the weblogs have given him a forum to state the case against tort "reform"; and other reasons.
And about the choosing of blogs against books, Evan Schaeffer write “It’s true that for me, a book will always be a more satisfying resume credit than a weblog. But weblogs do allow serious writers to try out new ideas, new styles, new methods for telling a story. This is one of the things I like about this weblog, and why I’ll probably keep it going, at least for a while, after I pass the one-year mark. But I must admit I’m a little ambivalent, at least from day to day.”
His partner in teaching bloggins for lawyers, Federalist No. 84, add that “it occurred to me that every legal blog I read is top quality. Hell, even the legal blogs I don't read are very good. Really, there's not a crappy one out there. We mused for a while before realizing that the reason is that a good lawyer (re: an attorney who has the personal motivation and professional accomplishment to walk his own path) will live and die on his reputation.
Generally, only good lawyers and law profs blog. And since they're so concerned about their reputations, they want to produce their best work. Thus, lawyer blogs are very good since a blogger, more so than any group other than professional scholars, put themselves out to the world for criticism and correction.
He also wrote one of the best tips for bloggers that I never read, about “Brand Your Blawg”: “You need a unique name for two reasons. First, you want something to stick in my mind. Second, you want me to be able to find you on Google. Thus, “lawyer blog” or “criminal law blog” would be a very bad idea for a name. For Ken Lammers, CrimLaw works well, but that’s only because of his terrific Google ranking (which resulted from all of blawggers linking to his first class blawg). A fledgling blogger needs something distinct. …Your unique name should be in the URL of your blawg. Lawdork used to known as Law, Politics, and Press with an according mismatch between name and URL. That’s a mouthful, and a mistake. Chris is a savvy guy, he fixed this problem, and we’re all better off.
Our good friend David from HaikuEsq is the worst culprit. I can’t remember his URL, so every time I want to read him, I need to Google him or click-through from my blogroll. However, if I’m were not a blogger, he might have lost me as a reader, since I would have forgotten the title of his blawg.
One of the most underrated blawgs, I’m A PD, has a weird Xanga URL. I know how to find the blawg, but imagine the hapless reader who wants to find her but can’t, because Googling “public defender blog” brings up a lot of results, but I’m A PD is not in the first 100. She has a catchy title, but a crappy URL. Accordingly, she has probably lost of a lot of readers. Worst of all, her blawg is among the best. Everyone loses when you don’t brand your blawg.
Thus, in branding your blawg, ask two questions: Will my readers remember me; and will they be able to find me on Google?”
Posts
Hello, Prof. T. Despite it's URL, I'm happy to say that one or two thousand people a day (and sometimes many more) find their way to my weblog, which has been called f/k/a for almost 5 years.
ReplyDeleteThe URL -- http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/ethicalesq/ -- ends with the original name of the weblog, EthicalEsq.
I didn't want to change the URL when I changed the site's name and broadened its scope, for fear of losing my original audience. I've also kept it, because I like being on the Harvard Law webserver, which does not offer the option of a personalized domain name. I believe the harvard.edu domain is a prime reason Google ranks my blog so high and sends about a thousand people a day to the site. [Hundreds of links help, too, of course.]
On a more personal note, my tiny disability income puts paying for a domain name and hosting service very low on my spending priority list.
A lot of people apparently use blogrolls, Bookmarks and RSS feeds to find f/k/a. And, as you suggest, I'm fairly easy to find using Google. Good content will bring readers, I think, despite an awkward URL.
By the way, I do not agree that "lawyer blogs are very good" as a general proposition, unless you mean compared to the typical teenbopper blog.
Thank you very much for your explanation. I was surprised by the numbers of visitors of your Blog, with the help or not of the Harvard domain.
ReplyDeleteYou are right, probably today not all the blowgs are pretty good, since there are so many...
Salvador Trinxet