MENTIONED IN THE NEW YORK TIMES . . . Which is cool, except that the writer got the facts wrong. I cover Ohio law? Actually, I practice in Missouri and Illinois, and there's nothing on this weblog exclusive to Ohio. In fact, I think of this site as having a national scope. Anything wrong with that?
Neil Wehneman of the Life of a Law Student podcast gets top billing. Many other law-bloggers are mentioned or quoted. Here's the article: "Opening Arguments, Endlessly."
UPDATE: Mike Cernovich at Crime & Federalism: "In publishing an article about legal blogs, the Times shows why blogs were born."
I saw, congratulations on being misquoted.
The article looks a lot like the original entry for "blawg" on wikipedia, which has been edited down and tightened by repeated editings. That is to say, it looks like what I wrote - which is not surprising, as we had the same assignment: write a content-free viewpointless brief piece on the word blawg, and mention the most important ones.
I must say, I was surprised by how few fact errors there were - yours is the only one I notice so far. The article looks like an extraordinarily ordinary piece of reporting - almost lazy, in fact. (Did they check with the blawgers they quote or describe - say by e-mail - to confirm that the article was accurate about them? Does the piece contribute anything new or surprising? Is there a reason to have a quote? Does anyone disagree with the consensus definition?)
That said, it was more "in-depth" than my brief wikipedia entry, now further shortened, and it's not like I'm habitually writing for a major periodical. I'm one of the pajama brigade.
Posted by: Eh Nonymous | October 07, 2005 at 09:12 AM
I had some "issues" (for lack of a better word) in my write-up too. I was interviewed during intro week, and I had just started the project. Hence, I didn't have much traffic. But now I'm pushing out a respectable amount of traffic (thanks in part to you Evan!) It would have been nice if Mr. Glater had updated that fact, but I don't overly fault him for that.
He also really glossed over the fact that I'm doing audio. I have very little written text on the site itself. But I also see how putting that fact in could water down his subject matter.
Oh, well. All in all I still appreciate the press and the linkage.
- Neil
Posted by: Neil Wehneman | October 07, 2005 at 09:13 AM
I saw that also. Congrats on being mentioned, even though there were mistakes!
Posted by: Yeoman | October 07, 2005 at 01:21 PM
You should be thrilled with the mistake, because many more people read the corrections column than the tech page. Anybody can get mentioned in the Times--why, the Times once quoted me about whether my university should serve pork in one of its two cafeterias. But it takes a special individual whose life is complex enough to merit a correction.
Posted by: Ted | October 07, 2005 at 05:55 PM
Evan, Sorry for the double TrackBack -- there was a delay with the auto ping, so I thought I needed to do it manually.
You're right that you have a national scope -- and, you don't discuss cases all that much. It can't be bad having Ohioans surfing over to check you out. I must confess that a lot of Eastcoasters think of the MidWest as one big blur.
Just make sure Ohio Bar Counsel doesn't try to discipline you for UPL.
Posted by: David Giacalone | October 07, 2005 at 06:31 PM