Blogging can become addictive. So can following blogs, especially if one feels compelled to comment. But it all can become part of one's permanent record and retrievable to possibly bring about embarrassment, including negative impact on employment or re-employment. At my age (75) in retirement it is fun. But I wonder if I were in the prime of my legal career I would have time to have my own blog, let alone merely follow blogs. I would be concerned that perhaps my obligations to my clients, past, present and future, might be impacted by what I would have to say. These are not private conversations that only Big Brother has access to. And anonymity can with effort be overcome.

The Dean's phrasing reminded me of Bob Dole reciting his website addres in the 1996 presidential debate. It started with four (4) "w"s, and it didn't have any dots or periods....

Ok, another one: in Austin Powers, when Dr. Evil, resuscitated in 1996 after 30 or so years in cryogenic creeze, starts explaining this new evil tool he's developed: "I call it a 'LASER'," he explains slowly....

Shag, I have seen lawyer-bloggers express reservations about the effect of blogging on their practices. I can see that going either direction, depending on how the blog is executed.

Scott, thanks for those. You made me laugh ... twice.

As I re-read this post, I realize that it comes off as pretty arrogant. Especially the bit about the "marketing gimmick." Sorry about that. We have a policy of not changing posts, "even if we later regret it." So I will leave it up there, but I could have made the same points without being mean.

I read Saul's comments a little differently. His claim for "improvement" was about the individual author's original argument, which would be improved by comments. His claim for "expansion" was about expanding the blog contributions of UC faculty done individually to be a blog of the faculty as a whole. I didn't see any claim about improving or expanding the blog enterprise itself.

This, of course, says nothing about whether such a blog would indeed be interesting or an improvement over Posner-Becker etc, for instance.

Anon, really? I could imagine him writing something like that, but I cannot extract that from what he actually wrote.

Gordon, as an alum, I received the same letter and so did my former classmates. None of them read in to it what you did. It's probably because none of us have a blog and therefore none of us have a predisposition to be sensitive or defensive about the enterprise of blogging. This is particularly evident when you criticize his definition of a blog ("thoughts ... made available on the internet."). When you see this as a letter to alums (some of whom are old and still don't have a computer at their desks and even those not so old never use the internet), that defintion is not a jab at blogging, but an attempt to simply for alums. That's what Deans have to do all the time with faculty activities and scholarship. It's not as if he sent out a press release to the general public.

I'm happy to see the re-examination of your initial reaction to the letter. I thought Dean Levmore did a good job, considering how difficult it is to explain to people what a "blog" is if they are unfamiliar with blogging (even those who are well-educated professionals and use technology every day often don't get the concept--even after they have actually seen a blog--unless and until it becomes particularly relevant to them). With folks like Sunstein, Stone and Epstein already blogging (or publishing online in formats akin to blogging) even before this faculty blog was announced, this strikes me as a natural opportunity (and one that is more likely to make me dig in my pockets as an alumna than *cough* expensive brochures with fancy pictures).

Just want to clarify a couple of points.

First, I thought his description of blogging was cute, but not at all the way a blogger would write about it. It certainly was not the focus of my post.

Second, chutzpah is not a bad thing. My impression of the Law School is that people there think they are better than people almost anywhere else. Actually, that's one thing that attracted me to the place.

Third, the issue I found most interesting in all of this was that the Law School felt the need to organize the blogging activity. Or that organizing it would make it better. This is the place where I was critical. I think it is misquided, but maybe they can prove me wrong.