The Future of Law Blogging:
Over at PrawfsBlawg, Matt Bodie is considering the future of law blogging:twisted elite group presumably will change over time, too.
Among law professor blogs, the big variable would seem to be whether blogs eventually will be taken more seriously in the scholarly community than they are now. Right now most lawprof bloggers do it for fun, but don't consider blogging "real work." If this changes, I think it will transform the nature of law blogs considerably. Whether that would be a good thing or a bad thing is an open question.
We still seem to be in the early stages of the blogosphere. But I'm wondering, particularly with respect to law blogs, what the future holds. Here are a few possibilities as to directions we'll take in the future.It's hard to predict these things, of course, but I would suggest a fourth future: A continued increase in the overall amount of law blogging until we reach a natural equilibirum, and then a roughly constant amount of blogging with frequent turnover among active law bloggers. Here's my thinking. Right now law blogs are pretty new, and the number of law bloggers is increasing. But it's much easier to start a blog than to keep it up. A typical post might take an hour or so to research, write, and edit. And the better and more thoughtful the post, the more time it takes. Only so many people are willing to put in those hours on a regular basis, and members of that
1. We're in the "Far and Away" land rush phase, and pretty soon the continent will be filled up.
2. We're in the early Internet Boom phase, and a big shakeup is coming down the pike.
3. Blogging is a transitional technology that will lead to new forms of connectivity and creativity. Current bloggers will lead the way to these new formats.
Among law professor blogs, the big variable would seem to be whether blogs eventually will be taken more seriously in the scholarly community than they are now. Right now most lawprof bloggers do it for fun, but don't consider blogging "real work." If this changes, I think it will transform the nature of law blogs considerably. Whether that would be a good thing or a bad thing is an open question.
Is there a similar argument to be made for law blogging? If law Profs were encouraged to keep blogs would that make the discipline significantly stronger?
2. I think that generally we are past the boom phase. New blogs start all the time but the number which remain seem somewhat stable and in many areas the top blogs are already in place and stable.
3. Transitioning is possible but (as someone who does them) podcasts and videocasts just aren't the same. If you think a quality blog entry takes time you should try doing a quality podcast or video cast. I always end up somewhat unhappy with mine because I have sacrificed some quality just to get it done - and still it takes many more hours.
However, let me add the caveat that the above might not apply to Law Professor blawgs. Of late more and more of them seem to be surfacing. I guess this is a recognition in academia that blawgs are a serious medium, if not quite at the level of law reviews. I'll be interested to see if this leads to dilution, as readers split between the many, or if there will develop a hierarchy of first and second class professor blogs. Arguably this hierarchy already exists but competition seems to be increasing as schools back blawgs and even independent professor blawgs become more of a quality product.
Anyone who wants a blog can have one. It's just a lot of work.I put together a blog, put in a couple of posts, got busy at work, and never touched it again. I don't have the time. Now if I could only get a cushy prof job...
I'm guessing that you'll see the numbers rise somewhat, especially amongst academia. Eventually, you'll probably see retired academia as well. But I'm guessing that there will always be a big 5 or so that people look to. Reading blogs takes time too...