Two years later, I find myself writing “poor steve bainbridge” — http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/ethicalesq/2006/04/20#a6512 — after more trackbacks to f/k/a disappeared from Steve’s weblog. Might have to revise my “law professor” theory.

David, I think you are incorrectly making two things mutually exclusive “blogs created primarily as marketing tools and those written for the sheer joy of sharing ideas and information, or presenting a point of view.” The later type of blog, which you seem to be more fond of is in fact a blog that will work better for marketing purposes.

Lawyers by nature should be marketing themselves based on their knowledge, passion and idealism. Lawyers willing to get off their ass and use a blog, which is far easier to use than a Web site, and tell the world what they think and what they do based on their ideals will serve themselves well in attracting new work and in bonding with existing clients.

Of course there will be abuses like you describe but hopefully they will be the exception.

David, I think you are incorrectly making two things mutually exclusive “blogs created primarily as marketing tools and those written for the sheer joy of sharing ideas and information, or presenting a point of view.” The later type of blog, which you seem to be more fond of is in fact a blog that will work better for marketing purposes.

Lawyers by nature should be marketing themselves based on their knowledge, passion and idealism. Lawyers willing to get off their ass and use a blog, which is far easier to use than a Web site, and tell the world what they think and what they do based on their ideals will serve themselves well in attracting new work and in bonding with existing clients.

Of course there will be abuses like you describe but hopefully they will be the exception.