<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Lawyers Meta Blogging</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.stemlegal.com/strategyblog/2008/lawyers-meta-blogging/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.stemlegal.com/strategyblog/2008/lawyers-meta-blogging/</link>
	<description>by Steve Matthews</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 21:03:59 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Steve Matthews</title>
		<link>http://www.stemlegal.com/strategyblog/2008/lawyers-meta-blogging/comment-page-1/#comment-743</link>
		<dc:creator>Steve Matthews</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Nov 2008 23:06:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stemlegal.com/strategyblog/?p=103#comment-743</guid>
		<description>Thank-you for the thoughtful comments everyone. 

Mike, you had the only question that went unanswered, and it may still be that way when I&#039;m done :), but...

I would return to Carolyn&#039;s original post, and her recommendation of setting guidelines. The challenge of this perception (and whether it&#039;s an ethical issue, I don&#039;t know) is which services the lawyer in question chooses to align themselves with. Do these alignments create a positive &amp; professional impression? or do they cheapen the offering?

And as an SEO, I&#039;m also concerned with outbound links that aren&#039;t connected to the same subject matter as the blog. Too many unrelated links, and the underlying link network can lose focus. Potentially moving the website away from being a hub for its topic. And potentially reducing the rankings. There&#039;s room for any website to go off topic on occasion, but keeping focus is still important.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank-you for the thoughtful comments everyone. </p>
<p>Mike, you had the only question that went unanswered, and it may still be that way when I&#8217;m done :), but&#8230;</p>
<p>I would return to Carolyn&#8217;s original post, and her recommendation of setting guidelines. The challenge of this perception (and whether it&#8217;s an ethical issue, I don&#8217;t know) is which services the lawyer in question chooses to align themselves with. Do these alignments create a positive &#038; professional impression? or do they cheapen the offering?</p>
<p>And as an SEO, I&#8217;m also concerned with outbound links that aren&#8217;t connected to the same subject matter as the blog. Too many unrelated links, and the underlying link network can lose focus. Potentially moving the website away from being a hub for its topic. And potentially reducing the rankings. There&#8217;s room for any website to go off topic on occasion, but keeping focus is still important.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Craig Niedenthal</title>
		<link>http://www.stemlegal.com/strategyblog/2008/lawyers-meta-blogging/comment-page-1/#comment-742</link>
		<dc:creator>Craig Niedenthal</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Nov 2008 15:55:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stemlegal.com/strategyblog/?p=103#comment-742</guid>
		<description>Steve: Agree with you and Kevin that even if there are blogs out there addressing your specialty, you should still jump in.  Develop your own personal take and voice.  People will listen.  Interact with those other voices by commenting on their blogs and become part of the community.  There is room enough for all of us if you take it seriously and provide you own analysis on the issues instead of purely posting information.  If you sit on the sidelines, you will lose the game...sort of speak.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Steve: Agree with you and Kevin that even if there are blogs out there addressing your specialty, you should still jump in.  Develop your own personal take and voice.  People will listen.  Interact with those other voices by commenting on their blogs and become part of the community.  There is room enough for all of us if you take it seriously and provide you own analysis on the issues instead of purely posting information.  If you sit on the sidelines, you will lose the game&#8230;sort of speak.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Carolyn Elefant</title>
		<link>http://www.stemlegal.com/strategyblog/2008/lawyers-meta-blogging/comment-page-1/#comment-741</link>
		<dc:creator>Carolyn Elefant</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Nov 2008 11:48:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stemlegal.com/strategyblog/?p=103#comment-741</guid>
		<description>Thank you for fairly representing my views.  I agree that ultimately, the lawyer&#039;s practice comes first which is why you don&#039;t want to alienate your bread and butter.  At the same time, if you have a go to blog and are providing a service to the public beyond immediate clients, why not receive some benefits.  One example who comes to mind is Howard Bashman - he has ads on his popular Appellate Blog (though not on his website).  
My second point is that many times law blogs will effectively support advertising.  All of those &quot;top 100&#039;s&quot; and blog award things are technically honors, but they are also free advertising for the sponsors.  Many lawyers proudly display those logos and ads are really just another step in the continuum.  But I agree, it is a tough call where even I see both sides, so  I appreciate everyone&#039;s willingness to discuss the matter intelligently.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thank you for fairly representing my views.  I agree that ultimately, the lawyer&#8217;s practice comes first which is why you don&#8217;t want to alienate your bread and butter.  At the same time, if you have a go to blog and are providing a service to the public beyond immediate clients, why not receive some benefits.  One example who comes to mind is Howard Bashman &#8211; he has ads on his popular Appellate Blog (though not on his website).<br />
My second point is that many times law blogs will effectively support advertising.  All of those &#8220;top 100&#8217;s&#8221; and blog award things are technically honors, but they are also free advertising for the sponsors.  Many lawyers proudly display those logos and ads are really just another step in the continuum.  But I agree, it is a tough call where even I see both sides, so  I appreciate everyone&#8217;s willingness to discuss the matter intelligently.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mike O'Key</title>
		<link>http://www.stemlegal.com/strategyblog/2008/lawyers-meta-blogging/comment-page-1/#comment-740</link>
		<dc:creator>Mike O'Key</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Nov 2008 10:12:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stemlegal.com/strategyblog/?p=103#comment-740</guid>
		<description>One of the things I think you overlooked: What is the ethical perception of monetizing your site?  The point is to &quot;sell&quot; ad space, so is generating revenue for your blog perceived as a bad thing (selling out) or as a positive (successful enough of a publisher to attract advertisers)?  

Sites like BitterLawyer.com are obviously &quot;for profit&quot; sites (and the Living the Dream videos are hilarious, btw), but what about the more independent sites?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One of the things I think you overlooked: What is the ethical perception of monetizing your site?  The point is to &#8220;sell&#8221; ad space, so is generating revenue for your blog perceived as a bad thing (selling out) or as a positive (successful enough of a publisher to attract advertisers)?  </p>
<p>Sites like BitterLawyer.com are obviously &#8220;for profit&#8221; sites (and the Living the Dream videos are hilarious, btw), but what about the more independent sites?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mina Sirkin</title>
		<link>http://www.stemlegal.com/strategyblog/2008/lawyers-meta-blogging/comment-page-1/#comment-739</link>
		<dc:creator>Mina Sirkin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Nov 2008 05:23:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stemlegal.com/strategyblog/?p=103#comment-739</guid>
		<description>Sponsorships can be good, but you have to separate yourself as a lawyer, from a blogger.   If the blog is a firm blog, then I think sponsorship can be complicated and risky.  I don&#039;t have a problem with sponsorship on personal blogs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sponsorships can be good, but you have to separate yourself as a lawyer, from a blogger.   If the blog is a firm blog, then I think sponsorship can be complicated and risky.  I don&#8217;t have a problem with sponsorship on personal blogs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Susan Cartier Liebel</title>
		<link>http://www.stemlegal.com/strategyblog/2008/lawyers-meta-blogging/comment-page-1/#comment-737</link>
		<dc:creator>Susan Cartier Liebel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Nov 2008 02:36:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stemlegal.com/strategyblog/?p=103#comment-737</guid>
		<description>Steve,

I have mixed feelings on sponsorship, affiliate or adwords on lawyer blogs.  I saw Carolyn&#039;s post and didn&#039;t comment b/c of these mixed feelings.  But I&#039;m commenting here as I tend to agree with you.

The idea is to attract readers and keep them on your site, not distract them with another message UNLESS the sponsorship is on point in a meaningful way to the reader who comes to you..meaning a potential client.

It is hard to imagine who that sponsor would be, though. These are dangerous waters and I&#039;m not sure the dollar return is worth the risk.

However, if you are a lawyer blogging on a tangential topic or created a personal opinion blog or a service type blog, I might think differently on the subject but still with some trepidation.

Great post.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Steve,</p>
<p>I have mixed feelings on sponsorship, affiliate or adwords on lawyer blogs.  I saw Carolyn&#8217;s post and didn&#8217;t comment b/c of these mixed feelings.  But I&#8217;m commenting here as I tend to agree with you.</p>
<p>The idea is to attract readers and keep them on your site, not distract them with another message UNLESS the sponsorship is on point in a meaningful way to the reader who comes to you..meaning a potential client.</p>
<p>It is hard to imagine who that sponsor would be, though. These are dangerous waters and I&#8217;m not sure the dollar return is worth the risk.</p>
<p>However, if you are a lawyer blogging on a tangential topic or created a personal opinion blog or a service type blog, I might think differently on the subject but still with some trepidation.</p>
<p>Great post.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Grant Griffiths</title>
		<link>http://www.stemlegal.com/strategyblog/2008/lawyers-meta-blogging/comment-page-1/#comment-735</link>
		<dc:creator>Grant Griffiths</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Nov 2008 01:24:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stemlegal.com/strategyblog/?p=103#comment-735</guid>
		<description>Great round of post there Steve and thanks so much for including mine.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great round of post there Steve and thanks so much for including mine.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
