Blogging - can it help your legal career?

Author: Ben Wheway

21 Feb 2011 | 13:53 | 16 comments

Tags:
Blogs

For many in the legal profession, blogging remains something of an alien concept, an attitude encapsulated by media lawyer David Allen Green last week when recalling the reaction of a partner to his suggestion that more lawyers should blog: "Some of us have client work, dear boy."

Green, better known perhaps as the blogger Jack of Kent and legal commentator for the New Statesman, was speaking at a debate hosted last Thursday (17 February) by 1 Crown Office Row, which took an informal look at law blogging.

The event featured a panel also including 'Head of Legal' Carl Gardner and Adam Wagner (pictured), the human rights barrister and one of the editors of 1 Crown Office Row's much-admired UK Human Rights Blog. Topics covered included the etiquette of online discussion, the declining coverage of law in the mainstream media, and the reasons bloggers feel compelled to express their views in the public arena of the internet.

And although for many blogging remains a purely personal pursuit (see panel absentee Charon QC's self-description as a "hooligan law blogger... chucking metaphorical bog rolls at the profession") blogging can offer a professional opportunity for up-and-coming lawyers.

This was referenced by Wagner as one of his main motivations to blog - as a junior barrister in a ruthlessly competitive profession, a well-read and respected blog can serve as a way to help you stand out from the crowd (and in Wagner's case, it undoubtedly has).

Wagner also convincingly argued that writing a blog can make you a better lawyer - pushing the author to keep on top of recent legal developments, as well as providing intensive practice in presenting arguments in a concise fashion that the lay reader and client can understand and engage with.

It was a fun night, although with most attendees (perhaps inevitably) on their best behaviour at this debut event, the debate only began to touch on the interesting tensions, conflicts and ethical issues inherent in legal blogging (and the complex relationship between bloggers and the media). A second debate, already pencilled in for later this year, is likely to cover such questions in more depth.

For Legal Week's City readership, one interesting aspect of the debate would have been the discussion about the extent to which blogging can be a valid business and communication tool for law firms.

The dismissal of blogging as being solely for those with too much time on their hands is common, and unsurprising given the long-hours culture of the legal profession. Yet law firms devote much time to producing client briefings, alerts and white papers, and those that already do this successfully use elements of blogging such as personal opinion, engaging headlines and the radical concept of accessible writing to distinguish their output from bland marketing material.

And one thing that was apparent at the debate was that not only are there lawyers and barristers out there already producing popular and interesting law blogs - they are also actively enjoying doing so.

For many overworked associates, the concept of writing a law-related blog on top of the day-to-day demands of their job will hold little appeal. But for many it will come naturally - so should law firms be doing more to cultivate the frustrated writers and journalists among their ranks?

Well, given the substantial resources City law firms are already devoting to producing (in many cases very strong) client briefings, it is surprising that some haven't reallocated some of that investment into blogging and social media. Why, for example, hasn't Linklaters or Freshfields created a must-read corporate finance blog? There is certainly space for a City law firm to create an equivalent of The New York Times' Deal Book - which bridges the gap between corporate finance and at-the-coalface deal lawyering.

In many ways, the UK Human Rights Blog demonstrates a model that law firms could follow by taking the client briefing concept and giving it a deft spin for the social media age. The upside is that you get a way to reach an audience that is in tune with the times, while also offering the contributing authors a chance to take far greater ownership of their work than an anonymous client briefing.

The next legal blogging debate is set to take place in May. Check http://ukhumanrightsblog.com or follow @davidallengreen for more information.

Click here to follow Legal Week on Twitter, and click here to follow Ben Wheway.

COMMENTS (TOTAL 16 COMMENTS)

A Dealbook for the legal world

It sounds like a good idea to have a version of DealBook for the legal world. But who would read it, other than other lawyers? DealBook is little more than a news round-up for Wall Street/Corporate America. So far, the news stories on Legal Week and The Lawyer fulfil that function. Any discussion around changes/developments in law are already dealt with by firms in mailshots to their clients, or in detailed contributions to PLC.

Political Realist -21 Feb 2011 | 15:08

Realist - two obvious problems with your mailshot theory: one, you can only reach existing clients, not potential clients or a wider audience. And, two, the slow turnaround on conventional law firms' legal development briefings means that many of them are outmoded by the time they reach clients. If clients are getting information from the internet, including social media, which a fair chunk already are, how well-suited do the current efforts of law firms look?

Anonymous -21 Feb 2011 | 16:51

Anonymous - It is not my "mailshot theory", but just a statement of how things currently work. If a law firm did start up its own Dealbook-style website, then (i) would the content be any less out-of-date than mailshots by the time it actually gets posted on the website, and (ii) would clients actually read it? Personally, I can't see it happening.

Political Realist -21 Feb 2011 | 18:10

It would be less out of date if law firms went with the grain of the form and made it much faster-moving. Don't you think client communication should move with the times?

Anonymous -21 Feb 2011 | 18:57

Point?

I'm not saying law firms shouldn't move with the times. My point is that a lot of effort would be wasted as no-one would read these blogs. I'm not sure what your point is.

Political Realist -21 Feb 2011 | 22:15

Two points in response. Not many clients read the legal briefings that law firms are already producing. And a good legal blog could attract a decent audience. As the article says, The Human Rights Blog has only been going for a year and has already built up a sizeable readership.

Anonymous -22 Feb 2011 | 08:54

All valid points. But....

What's been interesting to read in the comments on this article is the general assumption that no-one reads legal blogs. In my experience, this couldn't be more wrong. I write my own and have written two books in my spare time and, as the article suggests, it's helped to keep me updated with developing issues and make my point concisely. What it's also done is forced me to focus on my audience - the problem remains that many firm mailshots or client updates just aren't client-friendly or geared to a particular sector. If a blog, tweet or any other update is well-written, it'll find an audience.

Steve Kuncewicz -22 Feb 2011 | 09:11

Hell will freeze over first

I'm not surprised that there aren't more solicitors' firms publishing blogs. Barristers just have to decide whether they think it is worth putting their own name to something. Anyone, particularly outside the equity partnership, at a large law firm will know how hard it is to get any public statements of opinion on law through internal governance procedures.

Conflicts, real and perceived, have to be checked. Tone has to be checked (I got a string of angry client emails to my senior partners last year for QUOTING the words of an ECJ judgment in a briefing because they didn't realise or believe that the inflammatory language was what the Court said rather than me attempting to inflate the importance of the issue to readers). Strategic advantage has to be considered (eg in drafting a firm response to a consultation paper we had to exclude a good point that would make the proposed legislation more effective because we took the view that the last thing our clients really wanted was for the legislation to be that effective).

By the time you have gone through that, fought with partners who are sensitive or over-sensitive about any possible impact on their own client relationships and would rather the firm did no marketing so that they could just get on with their own client business unimpeded, and produced some bowdlerised piece a day after the issue was news, you realise it isn't worth the bother.

So you go and publish semi-anonymously and privately. And, I guess, grit your teeth when success means that your firm belatedly starts issuing press releases boasting of having "the influential opinion former" (you) in its ranks.

As a recently unemployed lawyer, I'll let you know whether blogging stands in the way of getting another job!

botzarelli -22 Feb 2011 | 10:42

Freedom to blog

I agree with Steve Kuncewicz that if a blog, tweet or any other update is well-written, it'll find an audience, although as a relatively new blogger who has been going for a couple of months there are times when confidence lags and you wonder who’s out there, no matter how encouraging the readership stats may seem. But I think that’s true with any writing.

However, I also agree with botzarelli. Having worked in a number of law firms over a 20-year period, I wonder how many of them will be willing to take a chance on blogging, how many of them will "get it". Bureaucracy and ego often get in the way of good ideas at these places, and woe betide the associate who inadvertently upsets a client by offering an opinion that conflicts with that client’s business model or world view. In such an environment, and given the state of the jobs market, it is understandable that people would not feel able to blog other than anonymously. There may be firms where greater freedom is encouraged, perhaps where the client roster allows it.

Now I am a self-employed consultant, I like to blog primarily as a way of keeping up to date and also because I enjoy it. Writing in a way that hopefully the lay reader can understand and find interesting concentrates the mind far more than does a casual read through of the legal press. I also think you reach a different and more diverse audience that is global in reach. I accept though that in my current capacity, like a barrister, I just have to choose whether to put my name to something, not a firm’s name.

Whether it can lead to more work (or employment) or will stand in the way of it, as botzarelli speculates, time will tell...

Jon Dickins -22 Feb 2011 | 11:50

Blogging to Advance your Legal Career

Not sure if blogging is going to make you stand out at the Bar. I think people will be more interested in what your Chambers profile says about you, and your LinkedIn profile.

Simon Broomer -22 Feb 2011 | 12:44

Stand out, or stick out like a sore thumb

Interesting comments so far, but the article has grabbed my attention!

I am an advocate for the exploits of social media these days, and I do follow a number of blogs, and I think they are really quite unique in that they offer a different perspective, not only on the professional/legal issues (subliminal or not), but the professional itself. So, personally I say go for it (In moderation!)

Can it really damage your career? I'm going to need to take some time to think about this one. I think in some ways, provided it is done so with an element of aptitude, it can actually make an individual stand out from the sea of lawyers seen around any day of the week, and adds an element of personality. Handled wrong though, and I think its more a case of stick out like a sore thumb, than stand out from the crowd!

Ben Blogger to be -22 Feb 2011 | 13:10

Blogging

Blogging is a great way of spreading news about your firm and other current news. It can really help to build your reputation.

Solicitors in London -25 Feb 2011 | 14:29

Blogging

I think law firms are a long way from understanding the need or importance of maintaining a blog. Most still don't understand their clients well enough to know whether they get any value out of their existing media, and so the introduction of a new media platform is unlikely to be of much use until they have gone through some form of analysis. I would also want to do some research similar to that done by Forrester on the Social Technographics model so that the people that I was trying to reach were likely to consume content in this way. I write because it helps me think, maintain a voice in my space and to raise issues that I think are important for the legal profession. If I was doing it for a ROI all the time I am sure that it would not hold the same appeal.

Julian Summerhayes -28 Feb 2011 | 10:01

Managing your Online Presence

It seems many people in these comments have suggested blogs would not be read even if written by legal firms and professionals, but how engaging are you making that content? Sure, boring blogs might not attract much attention but if you put together really useful, really informative blogs you stand a good chance of being noticed and acknowledged as an expert in your field.

Aside from that, there is the SEO element to blogging. Search engines seek new, fresh content in order to distinguish which sites are the most relevant and useful and should therefore feature higher in search rankings. Your blog will not only provide that new content but, providing it's a useful resource to people, they will link back to it and again that's a great way of improving your search rankings.

Even using your blog as a simple news feed can provide great ammunition for journalists to promote your business for you and allow clients and prospective clients to see what you're up to, such as the one at www.blusource.co.uk

It doesn't need to take a long time but I can certainly see benefits to blogging.