David Giacalone at f/k/a raises the interesting question of how pop culture influences the perception of the law and lawyers, and what we should do to deal with it.

The issue arises via lawprof James Elkins, who

challenges the “reality critique”— the supposition by some legal scholars that law as portrayed on screen inaccurately represents law, lawyers, or the “legal system.” He also claims that “we know far less about the effects of popular culture on law and lawyering than we would like to think we do.”

So David posits a few questions to some blawgers:

Although I’m admitting sloth and avoiding commentary these days, I’d like to hear what blawggers — such as Anne Reed at Deliberations, Dan Solove at Law & Humanities Blog and Concurring Opinions, Anne Skove at Court-o-Rama, and Scott G-r-e-e-n-f-i-e-l-d of Simple Justice — have to say about some of the issues raised by Jim Elkins:

• Are jurors “influenced” by popular culture representations
of law and lawyers?
• Do lawyers and judges think that jurors are being influenced
by popular culture representations?
• How does the influence of popular culture representations
change the legal system?

Notably, Mr. Sloth Giacalone punts to others without offering his own finely honed views.  I know what I think, and plan to get back to this tomorrow, right after I hear from what others here think.

So, is pop culture a real influence on what we do and how we're perceived?  Consider, for example, the "CSI Effect."  Do we all want to secretly portray ourselves as Atticus Finch (without sharpshooting skills, unless you're in Texas)?

By the way, if you want to know why David spelled out my name, it's to make sure I appreciate that he got it right this time, because he has this awkward tendency to call me Greenberg (like my mother used to do).