11 Jan Law Blogging Without a Safety Net
11.01.06
|
3 Comments
Yesterday was not a stellar day for the law blog community. Here is what some of the most popular law blogs on the Internet were discussing: Volokh Conspiracy had a post that compared Ted Kennedy to Joseph McCarthy, Concurring Opinions had a post that had no less than 20 references to Jennifer Aniston nude, Professor Bainbridge had a post about Senator Joseph Biden cruising for chicks at Princeton, TaxProf Blog had a post about a flaming mouse, Conglomerate had a post about Coca-Cola with sugar, and How Appealing had a post on “scutinizing the virtue of girls” (yes, he is talking about that). By comparison, blogs like Althouse that long ago jumped the shark looked positively serious yesterday.
I know that law bloggers are posting without a safety net, but perhaps just a little more discipline might be in order? It is after all a new medium that we are trying to establish. I don’t want to sound like the Jiminy Cricket of law blogs, but these are all law blogs that I greatly enjoy, and law professors that I greatly respect.
As Larry Solum has admonished: “Blog in haste, regret at leisure.”
Perhaps a look in the mirror might be in order. You forgot to add the Blawg Rankings at Opinio Juris to your list of non-substantive posts.
Don’t forget — We had a post critiquing Henry Mansfield’s Straussian distortion of constitutional separation of powers over at Balkinization. No wonder, I suppose, that we’re losing the competition for traffic (although David Luban’s piece is terrific — honest).
Perhaps I ought to add a post pondering what Judge Alito thinks about Jennifer Aniston (and vice versa).
picture of zoroastrianism