[from Jack Cliente:] I’m typing this quickly, while Mr. Editor is listening to The Sinister Pig, Tony Hillerman’s latest audiobook. Let’s be frank, the worries mentioned in today’s article from the ABA eJournal — about “Problems Ahead” for blogging lawyers — are just plain silly (July 25, 2003, written by Stephanie Francis Ward).
Like Howard, and Denise, and Steven [in SWVirginia] “we” over here at ethicalEsq have a lot more faith in clients than does the average uptight lawyer (is that redundant?).
Attempts to stifle blogging attorneys are far more likely to come from paranoid partners, thin-skinned judges, and butt-covering bureaucrats than from actual breathing and thinking clients. If a lawyer doesn’t have the good judgment it takes to have both a personality and an opinion online, while keeping clients happy, he or she should stay away from blogging, and maybe from lawyering. Of course, being in retired status, our Editor feels no chilling effects in any case (at least not when he’s under his blankie).
P.S. from the Editor: It’s strange. Lawyers often seem to think they have to appear very bland or very offensive to be successful. My law school went out of its way to attract interesting students — from a former POW and a topless go-go dancer, to pop idols and pimply boy geniuses. Yet, by midway through the first semester, no one talked about anything other than law and law school gossip (and, sometimes, spectator sports). Even while in practice, my survival response to “Do you want to have lunch?” was always “Not if you’re talking law.” Blogging lets us all have a personality and a professional persona, while focusing on topics of interest and expertise. We can’t let the bean counters and worrywarts shut us down.