Skip to main content

There's a lack of UK blawgers?

Well, apparently, according to the recent Times article.

The only problem is, Alex Wade doesn't seem to have bothered actually doing any proper research. They've decided that only staff at law firms are likely to blog, or have any knowledge of the law, thereby ruling out advocates / barristers, academic law professionals, support staff / librarians, students.... There are lots of law blogs out there, by all sorts of people working in the law, all it takes to find them is a few minutes!

I randomly selected one of the blawgs listed in the article, and a quick look at some of Geeklawyers blawgroll lists the following:
And link-hopping from these can find you even more UK blawgs, and the blawgs of anonymous law students and those in pupillage...so why didn't the Times journalist actually spend the time to do that? Also, as discussed here, some of the blogs linked to aren't even current. And the final, splendid point  -  the fact that almost none of the links work, as there have been spaces inserted into them...go proof readers! Or, should that be 'link-checkers'?
Labels:

Comments

Anonymous said…
Furthermore my blawgroll is rarely attended to; there are loads more that I could add if I wanted. Binary law was/is best directory
23 August 2008 at 08:40
Anonymous said…
Jennie Law.... I suspect (a) That Wade could not be arsed to Wade through any blogrolls - shoddy journalis ... and (B) I suspect the dark hand of Messieurs Newsom and Geeklawyer - in their drive to appear on TV, radio, the press and net media... were fivers involved... only time will tell.

Being serious - we shall just have to attend to our promotion of blogs...

I am cancelling my subscription to the Times of course and shall be referring to this preposterous report by Wade in my Postcard from The Bounty this weekend

Charon QC
from The Boat, Chelsea
23 August 2008 at 14:13
Minx said…
No-one gives a toss about us Putative Barristers(Pupils and otherwise)/Bar and Law Students of course, even though we make up quite a bit of the blogging community. Then again, I we should be used to invisibility, given the account the profession takes of us, and esteem in which we are held (i.e. lower than WhalePooh)
Though I am very Glad to see Mr GeekLawyer mentioned the whole Times piece is poorly thought through and extremely shody.

I am a bit cross.
24 August 2008 at 10:41
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Careering along

When I look around at the activities of information professional groups, it seems that there’s a disparity. There’s quite often a lot of support and funding available for those who’re just starting out in the profession, but a desert of nothingness for those of us who’re “just getting on with it”. If you’re a new professional, you have lots of groups to support you as you progress in your early career, various prize funds available for essay and report writing, access to bursaries for conference attendance, eligibility for awards for being new and enthusiastic. But what do you get when you’re past that bright-eyed-and-bushy-tailed first 5 years (5 years seems to be the approximate cut-off point for becoming “established” and no longer new). What happens when you’ve already received a bursary from an organisation earlier in your career and so wouldn’t be eligible for one now, meaning you’re not able to attend events or training? When you’re heavily involved in a project but not at
16 comments
Read more

What's in a name?

In the case of this blog, it's a name that had no particular thought or planning behind it - I had no idea whether I would actually want to keep it going, what I would blog about, or that anyone would ever read it. Well, it's almost 4 years later (17th June 2007 is blog birthday, if we're counting), and the blog's still here, so I think we can now safely assume that it's probably going to be sticking around. And the name's been getting on my nerves a bit...you have no idea the amount of people who have found this blog looking for ladies called Jennie Law or Jenny Law. Personally, I'm not actually called Jennie Law, so I'm no help to these poor searchers, although for the right fee I could maybe consider pretending to be... I also don't blog a huge amount about law: I'm not a lawyer, I just have the job of finding stuff for lawyers. Sometimes that process amuses me, sometimes it annoys me, and I blog about it. Sometimes I write about library is
9 comments
Read more

Losing the professionalism

So, recently, CILIP apparently sent out an email regarding a consultation on a change of brand image, and name. I say apparently, as despite being a member, I never got this email. When I went to the website to log in and check why it wasn't sent to me, it didn't let me log in. I tried a password reset, and that email came through, so it *can* send emails to me...but the password it sent won't let me log in. I’m losing the will to keep trying. Overall, this is kind of symptomatic of how I feel about CILIP, and how useless its IT systems are.... Anyway, the consultation is on changing CILIP’s currently, clunky and meaningless name (picked as the best of a previous bad lot, as David McMenemy showed with this link to the 2000 consultation results ) to something more meaningful and relevant is open. If you want to take part, it’s here . I was a good girl, and pootled over yesterday to take part, and after filling in all the bumph, I got to view the glorious options. Oh. My.
5 comments
Read more