Comments on: Legal Publishing in the 21st Century

By: Simon C

Simon C — Wed, 27 Sep 2006 00:04:22 +0000

I think that what these journals need is passion: enthusiasm for ideas and issues. To give two examples compare American Lawyer (Brill and post-Brill) and National Post (Lord Black and Asper). I disagree vehemently with the views of both Steve Brill and Conrad Black, but they were interesting to read because they cared about ideas and issues, and were prepared to fund good writers, and give them the space needed. And the graphical zip of the publications showed it.
The challenge comes when they move into a corporate or institutional space, and are subject to the necessary pressures. The takeovers of all publications from founding editors is difficult.
I am simply amazed that Lexpert has survived John Alexander Black's exit, and that Wayne Bigby lasted as long as he did. Those who welcome a challenge can apply at http://www.carswell.com/careers/showjob.asp?ID=695
And no I'm not aware of anyone on Bay Street who took the publication as seriously as John Alexander Black.
I wouldn't regard Lexpert as presaging anything about the market for Canadian legal journalism. Whereas Melissa Kluger might just be the new wave.

By: campbell

campbell — Tue, 26 Sep 2006 22:37:10 +0000

The blog "precedent" is, I agree, entertaining and fresh; however, I disagree with the premise that older, more traditional journals should be holus/bolus replaced by new media and forms of communication simply because they can.

I have regularly read the Advocate http://www.vancouverbar.ca/advocate because it does exactly what it sets out to do. It is certainly easier and more informative than wading through a host of other information sources related to law and lawyers in BC and it has the advantage of being well edited.

The discussion around the emergence of new forms of media should, I think, not fall into the trap of assuming they will replace the older, more traditional forms – they may provide a diffferent kind of thinking and learning, but just as print didn't eliminate hand writing and manuscript, the history of technology shows that a new technology usually only displaces the older technology.

By: Jordan Furlong

Jordan Furlong — Tue, 26 Sep 2006 19:51:02 +0000

Connie, I keep wondering myself when the online providers like QL/Lexis and Carswell/Westlaw will be affected by the democratization of legal information on the Internet. I get the sense CANLII has taken some of the market share (I'd be interested in knowing how much), and full RSS update capacity in every court would take some more, I imagine.

But until someone like Google creates an advertising-based free-access legal research functionality — which seems plausible, at least — the online providers should continue to do alright. I think Simon C touched on these sorts of issues in a post here last November, "What would Microsoft research make of law?"

By: Connie Crosby

Connie Crosby — Tue, 26 Sep 2006 18:39:38 +0000

Do you think these ideas translate to other areas in publishing, notably the online information providers? Seems to me every year there are a number of little niche start-ups springing up that pull a small part of the clientelle away from the main vendors. At what point will this effect really be felt, really make in-roads?

By: Jordan Furlong

Jordan Furlong — Tue, 26 Sep 2006 16:45:28 +0000

It would indeed be a major shift, Steve, in this industry anyway. While some major ad agencies and a few of the bigger corporate entities out there have both the insight and the resources to work directly with the most popular bloggers, that may not be the case for the relatively smaller operations that seek to advertise to lawyers, especially in this country. As a result, ALM and like operations will do well with such networks for awhile yet — but I do think it's a transitory stage, because advertisers eventually adapt to the most effective model out there.

Really, it's the same with the "client revolution" we discussed yesterday, or any of the sea changes we often talk about (wish for?) in the practice of law. The change always seems to come much later than its boosters predicted — but much more suddenly than anyone was anticipating.

By: Steven Matthews

Steven Matthews — Tue, 26 Sep 2006 16:27:57 +0000

Jordan, that makes sense. One further thought I had was that Advertisers, who have traditionally been reluctant to embrace the online medium, may be even more hesitant to directly advertise on blogs. (?) And beyond legitimacy (which has now been a struggle since the late 90's), I have to wonder if Advertisers are prepared to manage campaigns with hundreds (thousands?) of independents, rather than dealing with a single, central, well trusted partner? And if they are, that would be a major shift in the advertising realm, would it not?

Connie, I have no doubt that Lexpert is well received on Bay Street, TO generally, or even among ANY of the seven sisters. :-)

By: Jordan Furlong

Jordan Furlong — Tue, 26 Sep 2006 16:01:35 +0000

Connie, I can't comment much on our competitors, but I will say this: Lexpert was the first publication to recognize that this is a fragmented profession with dozens of niches waiting to be filled, and that narrowcasting is the way of the future. It deserves full credit for recognizing this and for seizing an important niche early on. That's a lesson that needs to be understood by everyone who wants to supply services, information or opinion to lawyers today. Trying to be everything to everyone dooms you to be nothing much to anyone.

By: Connie Crosby

Connie Crosby — Tue, 26 Sep 2006 15:49:42 +0000

A thought-provoking post, Jordan. When LEXPERT magazine first made the scene, it really created a buzz. It was slick, had an element of inside industry news (which in other circles might be called gossip) and spoke to the bottom line for those corporate lawyers who weren't interested in court cases and other litigation-related news. And seems to me it is still the best at covering Canadian management-related issues. Still, I doubt it has a lot to say to lawyers such as those at Hardcore Superstar. There is a lot of room still in Canada's long tail to find a niche in which to be heard.

By: Jordan Furlong

Jordan Furlong — Tue, 26 Sep 2006 15:41:11 +0000

Steve, I think it's an interesting development, and I give ALM full credit for trying to work blogs into a somewhat traditional business model. ALM's problem is going to be maintaining its own importance in the partnership. The bloggers supply the content, the advertisers supply the money, and ALM gives … what? Distribution? Profile? Legitimacy? These are all things that ALM provides now, but that the individual bloggers are rapidly acquiring on their own. Eventually, the bloggers are going to ask ALM: what do we need you for?

Dennis Kennedy and Jim Calloway, to cite just two examples, are becoming brands unto themselves, and more are following all the time. In the long run, the most widely read bloggers aren't going to need a traditional distribution network. And eventually, the ALM blog network could start looking a little like Saturday Night Live — a launching pad for future stars who keep leaving to strike it big on their own.

The only successful blog network model I can foresee is one that's grouped around a specific set of themes and ideologies — the Huffington Post looks like a good example. It helps to have entertainment celebrities blogging for you, of course.

By: Steven Matthews

Steven Matthews — Tue, 26 Sep 2006 14:39:23 +0000

Jordan, what do you think about blog networks like the ALM Legal blog watch? Free content for traditional publishers who know how to monetize? or simply a valid exchange of increased profile for advertising dollars?