{"id":5125,"date":"2004-11-12T11:00:13","date_gmt":"2004-11-12T15:00:13","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/formerlyknownas\/2004\/11\/12\/jobs-weblogs\/"},"modified":"2011-08-05T14:58:15","modified_gmt":"2011-08-05T18:58:15","slug":"jobs-weblogs","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/2004\/11\/12\/jobs-weblogs\/","title":{"rendered":"jobs & weblogs"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a><\/p>\n

one-breath punditry:<\/STRONG><\/EM>  Here are some ends and odds that touch on weblogs and jobs, employers,<\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
employees and work.<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n
\"tiny  News Librarian Jessica Baumgart<\/EM> of j’s scratchpad <\/A>points to two stories of interest to webloggers<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
who worry that their enterprise might lose them their current job or prevent being <\/FONT>hired in the future:<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n
Getting a Job Because<\/EM> of a Blog<\/A><\/FONT>.  Jessica cites a <\/FONT>Globe and Mail<\/EM> article<\/FONT><\/FONT><\/A> about employers who<\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
view an applicant’s well-done weblog as a positive factor in the hiring decision.  Joey deVilla<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
— <\/FONT>the accordionguy<\/FONT><\/A> — is given as one example.  The G&B<\/EM> article offers suggestions on ways a <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
blogger can use the medium to make her-\/himself a better candidate.  (e.g.,<\/EM> webloggers should<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
come out from <\/FONT>behind the veil of anonymity)<\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
Corporate Blogging Policies<\/A><\/FONT> This post links to material from <\/FONT>Charlene Li <\/FONT><\/A>of Forrester, who writes <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
about corporate weblogging <\/FONT>policies<\/FONT><\/A>, shares an example, and posts a code of ethics for company<\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
and employee.<\/FONT> <\/FONT><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/FONT>
\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n
the woodpecker works
one spot…
all through sunset<\/FONT><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n
<\/FONT><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE>\"arrow  A job for webloggers<\/STRONG><\/EM>:  Let’s <\/FONT><\/FONT>join Prof. Bainbridge<\/FONT><\/A> in urging the President and serious politicians to remove <\/FONT>the scourge of gerrymandering<\/FONT><\/A><\/EM> — and then following up and staying on the case to get the job done.  (See Redistricting is creating a US House of Lords<\/FONT>.<\/FONT><\/A> David Broder) Let’s use our gadfly talents in a cause that will greatly improve our system of politics and government.<\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n

\n
boom! boom! ka-boom!
so many duds…
fireworks<\/FONT><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
 <\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n

\n
The Law Professor’s Job<\/EM><\/STRONG>:  <\/FONT><\/FONT>Prof B<\/FONT><\/A>. also has a tribute to his professor <\/FONT>Stan Henderson<\/FONT><\/A> and quotes from<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
Henderson on the job of a law professor (and that of a lawyer, too):<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n
The point to be underscored is that, whatever the time period, it is passion and commitment <\/FONT>that <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
bring one to law study in the first place. And that is what carries one through law school and beyond, <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
whatever the career path.  <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
You now know that we teachers spoke the truth when we told you that we could do no more than prepare <\/EM><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
you for a lifetime of self education. <\/EM><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
We passed on the culture mainly by sowing seeds. But the real game <\/FONT>the discovery of self and a sense of purpose, of proportion was always yours, when you sat here in rows, <\/FONT>and when, in the years since, you have faced into the headwinds, at times fierce. <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/DIV>
\n
The Attorney General’s Job<\/STRONG><\/EM>:  The New York Times<\/FONT><\/EM><\/A>, and many webloggers (e.g<\/FONT><\/A>.), are talking about whether appointment of Alberto Gonzales<\/A> to be AG is more or less likely to position him for a Supreme Court nomination.  Despite Steve Bainbridge’s points<\/FONT><\/A>,<\/FONT> it seems to me that being recently vetted for Attorney General does not and should not give a nominee a get-into-court free card — not only are they very different positions, but service as AG may provide much insight about the candidate.  [Prof. B certainly cannot be gainsaid, however, that “Blogospheric prognostication has proved fallible.”  Is he similarly insightful in class?]<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
\"snow  Snow Job?<\/EM><\/STRONG>  <\/FONT>Bill O’Reilly<\/FONT><\/A> was on the <\/FONT>Charlie Rose Show<\/FONT><\/A> last night (11\/11\/04) — see the <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
forum discussion<\/FONT><\/A>.  O’Reilly says he now has people with him 24 hours a day to assure he never again<\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
gets attacked with false charges like the recent sexual harassment allegations.  Bill blames the<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
internet and weblogs for creating an atmosphere where every rich or famous person now has no<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
ability to defend themselves from false charges.  O’Reilly constantly stated that the settlement<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
agreement kept him from discussing the case (and that he had insisted on the clause) and<\/EM> that<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
the settlement “said I did nothing wrong.”  Charlie never noted that virtually all settlements use <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
that boilerplate.  <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n
the market workers
bare-chested…
spring snow falling<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
 <\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
\"tiny  Did we mention assigned work?<\/STRONG><\/EM> click<\/A> for a smile-groan.  \"laughing<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
Back to work<\/EM><\/STRONG>: <\/FONT><\/FONT>Stuart Levine<\/A><\/FONT> says he’s finally going to get back to work on his TaxBiz weblog.  We are<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
pleased (while remembering he seems to have said this before).<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
 <\/DIV>
\n

\n
the dragonfly, too
works late…
night fishing<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
all above haiku by <\/FONT><\/EM>Issa<\/EM><\/STRONG><\/FONT><\/A>, translated by <\/EM><\/FONT>D.G.Lanoue<\/EM><\/STRONG><\/FONT><\/A><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n

\n
\"tiny \"tiny  Not <\/EM>working<\/STRONG>: Despite our early enthusiasm for <\/FONT>Blawg Republic<\/FONT><\/A>, it seems clear <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
that its revamped format is not<\/EM> working.  I can get virtually any post (from my or another weblog<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
in its Directory) into the list of twenty “<\/FONT>Top Blawg Posts<\/FONT><\/A>” by just mentioning it on this humble<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
homepage.   From the many repeat weblogs on the list, others have learned this trick, too.  BR is no<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
longer <\/FONT>a place to go to see what is new in the weblawgiverse.<\/FONT><\/DIV><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n

\n
the anger from work<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
in my son’s birthday balloons<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n
George Swede<\/STRONG><\/FONT><\/A> <\/FONT>from <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/DIV>
\n
<\/SPAN>Almost<\/EM> Unseen: Selected Haiku of George Swede<\/EM><\/STRONG><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/A> <\/FONT><\/SPAN><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
<\/FONT><\/SPAN> <\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n
long deposition–
the lawyer’s
“at the risk of repeating myself” <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n
by <\/FONT>Barry<\/FONT> George<\/FONT><\/STRONG><\/FONT><\/A> <\/FONT> <\/FONT><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/SPAN>
\n
<\/FONT><\/SPAN> <\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n