A call came in yesterday from a reader and regular commenter, Lee Stonum.  We talked some about a post that held particular concern for him, and then about the blawgosphere in general.  It was good to talk to Lee, as he’s someone who isn’t afraid to speak his mind and disagree with me, but he knows what he’s talking about.

Among the various things we spoke of was the nature of my posts.  Lee mentioned how I don’t seem to discuss trial tactics often, but post more about issues in the news.  I explained that I used to discuss skills and tactics regularly, but there is only so much to say and I’ve already said more than my piece.  I don’t like to repeat myself.

But it got me to thinking, particularly since yesterday’s posts spanned three separate areas.  One post dealt with a substantive criminal law issue in the news, false confessions.  Another deal with the on-going Hayes trial.  A third dealt with a developing meme on twitter.  Guess which post garnered the most interest.

The relative number of page views pretty much mirrored the number of comments to each post.

This tells me something, but it’s really not something I want to know.  There is far more fascination with the nonsensical aspect of social media than there is interest in substantive law.  This infuriates me.

During my conversation with Lee, we talked about the blawgs we read and why.  I explained that I like reading the lawprof blawgs, to which Lee asked why I bothered.  After all, the lawprofs don’t have a clue about being a lawyer, and offer nothing of use in the trenches.  While that’s mostly true, some of them are incredibly smart and raise ideas that make a trench lawyer think.  They expand my thoughts, and I learn from it.

The marketers and social media gurus want me to say that I gain enormously from social media.  They want to point to me as an example of why others should hop aboard, for a reasonable fee.  The lawprofs aren’t trolling for clients, though there is definitely an internal contest for prestige and recognition within the Academy at stake.  The only folks online with nothing whatsoever to gain are the public defenders, provided that they aren’t thinking ahead to the day they set up their own shop.

Don’t get me wrong (though many will despite my saying this), I’m not telling others what should interest them and what they should read.  And if I did, it wouldn’t matter anyway.  People will do what they please and I have no control over anyone.  But the fact that navel gazing and social media fascination is more interesting than law stuff breaks my heart.

In the past, I’ve noted that some of the posts that I consider most significant are nowhere near as popular in terms of eyeballs as posts that I consider relatively trivial or unrelated to law.  Sometimes, they’re just posts about things I find funny.  I understand why funny posts tend to get read; we can always use a good laugh.  But I sometimes marvel at how much interest there can be in the trivial when bigger, more fascinating, more significant legal issues are out there dying for discussion and thought.  But it’s not interesting enough.  Not even to criminal defense lawyers.

None of this changes my thoughts about what interests me, or what I plan to write about.  If I was begging for eyeballs, then I would follow the numbers and post what interests the most people.  Frankly, eyeballs are damn near worthless.  Another part of my conversation with Lee was how all the social media marketing hoopla, at least for criminal defense lawyers, was total nonsense.  Take my calls from the internet.  Please. 

By my off-hand calculations, my posts are focused on criminal law about 75% of the time, and the balance on other subjects.  It’s not by plan, but purely happenstance.  Don’t care for some posts?  That’s cool.  Don’t read them.  But it’s my hope that some of you will care enough about legal issues, decisions, skills, so that I’m not left to think that the social marketers have a point, there there is no one online who gives a damn about substance and it’s all a big show for business. 

Then again, maybe it’s just that my substantive posts aren’t worth the effort to read.  If that’s the case, never mind.  At least I know that Lee reads them.  At least I’m not alone.