[ad_1]
Lawyers are turned off by legal blogging because of all the gimmicky and inauthentic legal blogs out there.
That’s what I am seeing after sitting on the legal blogging panel with Ifeoma “Iffy” Ibekwe, and Bob Ambrogi, and Teresa Matich at Clio – Cloud-Based Legal Technology’s #ClioCon this week.
A lawyer dropped me a note that I had given him much to think about in that he had written much, but had no medium on which to publish.
In response to my post here that lawyers don’t know what legal blogging is, he commented.
“I’ve resisted blogging largely because something about most of the legal blogs I’ve seen seems inauthentic and gimmicky. It was hard to see how I could publish information in a real, genuine manner that wasn’t merely a ploy to generate revenue.”
Lawyers seeing what I’d call spam blogs – content written for lawyers, not by them, solely to achieve search engine rankings, as opposed to real and authentic insight written by a lawyer, are understandably turned off.
Most lawyers go to law school to join a noble profession that enables them to serve people.
When it comes to publishing helpful insight and commentary, it’s understandable that lawyers would be publishing in as equally noble and authentic fashion.
When you look at much of what “blogs” have become, I can see why lawyers don’t want to be seen as part of the crowd that calls what they do as blogging.
When the Open Legal Blog Archive goes through legal blogs, by state, it’s finding well over half to be “spam blogs.”
Lawyers are now the exception when they use legal blogging to personally engage people, to help people and build relationships and a name in process.
Good thing it’s much like a jury trial. Jurors, in this case the public, can distinguish the authentic ones from the inauthentic.
I’ve been thinking lawyers might be turned off from the inauthentic blogging. I’m now finding it to be true.
[ad_2]
Source link
