I try not to cross-post with LIKELIHOOD OF CONFUSION® too often, but this seemed like a good general topic even though it’s “blawgy,” and increasingly the audience for the two blogs doesn’t really intersect:
I hadn’t picked up on this — as part of its “ABA 100” story, the ABA Journal published brief profiles of the seven “revolutionaries” of law blogging, as they see it:
- Denise Howell
- Thomas Goldstein
- David Lat
- Eugene Volokh
- Judge Richard Posner
- Glenn Greenwald
- Howard Bashman
All good choices. One thing I find noteworthy: Only one of them (Goldstein) works for a major law firm (though probably most or many of them have, at one time or another). I wish I had the time to run down the whole ABA 100. I suspect the big firms are way under-represented, especially considering the obsession with Big Law at publications such as American Lawyer.
Why? It’s not just because running a good legal blog is time-consuming. It’s because blogging well on a real topic requires independence of mind, a distinct style, strong opinions and willingness to stick out — not a good combination at all for success in institutional corporate law firms. Believe me.
It is the last evening of this turn of the calendar, and it need not have any special significance. But not surprisingly we cannot resist looking back — as, really, we should every day (but this we do resist!) of the year.
and the roughly equivalent one of reading blogs without commenting. I realize that in fact most people do these things and do not contribute to discussions. It was the same in school; most people do not wish to speak up in class. Yet here you can do so anonymously. There is no grading. Still you remain, mostly, silent. And what I crave is your society. Connection.
I guess I have to admit that I am basically a blogger (i.e., a writer who could not get enough paying work) who supports his habit with a day job as a better than average lawyer. I mean, who am I kidding?
