You are not logged in [login] | [register]
RSS MAD is both an RSS feed archive and online feed reader.
You can browse our categories, search for a feed, or if you already have a URL, use our online feed reader.
Simply start browsing the site, and if you find some feeds you like, register to view them on your own personalized page!
Searching 181304 articles in 8938 feeds.
Do you like RSS MAD? Why not spread the news and tell a friend about it - it's as easy as filling out this form!
added: Wed, 21st September 2005 | 442 views | 0x in favourites
feed url: http://kevin.lexblog.com/index.rdf
LexBlog is the leading provider of professionally designed marketing blogs for the lawyer, attorney or law firm. LexBlogs turnkey Internet marketing solution provides lawyers, attorneys and law firms blog consulting, custom design, hosting, training, search engine optimization and marketing for effective legal Internet marketing.
One week of midterms down, one to go. I hope your week wasn't as stressful as mine. If it was, stop working. It's Friday afternoon, time to close up shop with the ten best posts from around the LexBlogosphere. Have a great weekend everyone.
For the second week in a row, we were able to get five new blogs live, including two from EpsteinBeckerGreen. I probably should not have favorites, but as a journalism student I know I'll be following Brooks Pierce's Newsroom Law Blog as close as any LexBlog blog since we hosted Truehoop. I look forward to seeing what insight this blog and these others have to offer.
You've heard about other lawyers and marketing professionals using Twitter. You think they've lost their mind when they tell you they find Twitter an effective networking and communications tool. You've tried Twitter. You're convinced others have lost their mind, 'Twitter is the dumbest thing ever.'
If you're like me, looking at the Twitter interface and trying to make sense of that madness, it's easy to reach those conclusions. It was only after going to the well on Twitter for the 3rd or 4th time and using a Twitter application (think Firefox as a browser for the Internet or Outlook for email), that Twitter started to make sense.
After trying other Twitter applications, Geeklawyer, a London Barrister, turned me onto TweetDeck. TweetDeck rocks.
With TweetDeck, Twitter has become one of the most effective networking, PR, and reputation building tools at my disposal. I am generating significant new work for LexBlog via 'small talk' exchanges on Twitter. Small talk about personal affairs. Small talk about business. And small talk passing on stories I see (social media).
What's TweetDeck?
A desktop application you download to a a Mac or PC that aims to evolve the existing functionality of Twitter by taking an abundance of information, i.e twitter feeds, and breaking it down into more manageable bite sized pieces.
.png)
How's it do it?
TweetDeck enables users to split their main feed (All Tweets) into topic or group specific columns allowing a broader overview of tweets. The far left column will always contain All Tweets. The GROUP, SEARCH and REPLIES buttons then allow the user to make up additional columns of groups of Tweets. Once created these additional columns will automatically update allowing the user to keep track of a twitter threads far easier.
.png)
Just imagine if we told someone 10 years ago lawyers would need about things like Google, blogs, and Twitter to market and network effectively. Amazing world.
I've been meaning to share my thoughts (pain) on another collapse by the Cubs.
It's now becoming a reality that at age 52 that the Cubs may never make the World Series in my life time, let alone win the whole thing. With 1908 being the last Cubs' championship, this will be the second generation of my family (even if my parents were not rabid fans) that has not seen a Cubs' win. My grandfather, from Atlantic City, a Phillies fan born in 1895, was 13 the last time the Cubs won it all.
Now we hear that the neither of the presidential candidates has a plan to end the Cub's failures.
From SNL's special last night.
Bill Murray, a cub fan appearing as himself in a sketch lampooning the town-hall presidential debate last Tuesday, asked Sen. John McCain (Darrell Hammond) and Sen. Barack Obama (Fred Armisen) what they would do to ensure that the Cubs would never lose in the playoffs again.
Last week, in the National League divisional playoffs, the Chicago Cubs faced the Los Angeles Dodgers. In Game 1, the Cubs lost 7-3. In Game 2, they lost 10-3 and in Game 3, 3-1. What, as president, would you do to guarantee that this never happens again? Senators, in your answers, please be specific.
From Senator Obama:
That's a fair question, William, but let's face it, the Cubs may very well be in the playoffs again, perhaps even next year. If so, they will lose again, and they will keep right on losing year after year after year, because that is what the Cubs do. We as a nation have got to wean Cubs fans away from supporting that team and train them to root for other teams - teams that will actually have a chance at winning.
And Senator McCain:
Here I have to agree with my opponent. Let me give you some straight talk, my friends: The Cubs will never win the pennant, much less the World Series! Junior over there, he won't tell you that. I just did.
There you have it. Obama tells me to start cheering for the Tampa Bay Rays, a team that's hard to accept being in MLB. And McCain telling me to suck it up.
Thanks to all the folks at the New York City Bar Association (NYCBA) for hosting the blog panel presentation on Tuesday evening. Great job.
Thanks also to blogging Attorneys Scott Greenfield, Dan Clement, and Eric Turkewitz (going right to left, not in order of prominence Greenfield), my co-panelists. Well done guys.
The NYCBA doesn't screw around. We covered a lot of ground for the 50 plus in attendance. The program went 3 hours strong running from 6 to 9 PM. From what I could tell from the re-runs of the debate, that's more people than were attending live the Obama - McCain town hall forum that was running opposite of us.
We reviewed the basics of blogs, blog publishing platforms, better blogging practices, RSS and how to use it, the marketing of your blog, and little a social media. Even got into a little debate on topics such as what makes for a successful blog, whether lawyers will keep blogging, and the merits of using a blog for marketing. I suspect Turkewitz and Clement felt a little 'stuck in the middle' with Greenfield and I calling BS on the other.
Surprisingly no one in the audience was the user of RSS feeds and a newsreader. Even a couple years ago, I'd get a few RSS users in the crowd. Hope that's not typical of all New York lawyers, you're missing out on a powerful way to receive excellent information.
You may download a copy of PowerPoint we used here. As always, feel free to borrow as much or little of it as you like for your own presentation on law blogs. Also feel free to call or email me for additional information you may need or questions you have in preparing for presentations to your law firm or group.
A video recording of the presentation is coming out from the NYCBA. I still get people calling me saying they watched the whole 3 hour video from the program we did in '06. I'm tempted to say get a life.
For you folks that haven't seen the NYCBA building, check it out. Sits on 44th between 5th and 6th among old stand alone granite buildings like the Harvard club. Huge rotunda, marble steps, quite a place. We sure don't have anything like that in Seattle where old is 75 years.
Also note that the Memphis Pork Ribs at Virgil's Real Barbecue, where we headed afterwards, ain't too bad either. The Virgil's Ale was a little light by Seattle Micro-Brew standards.
Looking to bring me into your neighborhood to organize a blog panel presentation? Just holler. I'm easy. I'll do it for a beer in most cases - even when I have to buy.
After a day away caused by a blown out MacBook hard drive, I'm back with the roundup from across the LexBlogosphere. I'm now doing what I can from a computer lab in basement of the University of Montana School of Journalism. At least there's nice new iMacs.
With the exception of one great post by Max Kennerly, we step away from news on the financial crisis, which I'm sure everyone's seen close to enough of from other news sources. So, here are the ten best posts on recent litigation and other prominent legal news.
"Small talk leads to big things" is one of the Twitter rules we live by at LexBlog, and it seems more evidence of this comes to light each day.
Like last night, when King County Executive Ron Sims, who tweets under the username @ronsims, cited LexBlog client Chris Cheatham's Green Building Law Update as a noteworthy resource on green constructions issues...one that he'd already shared with key figures in the local legal community:

Just like that, in less time than it would have taken to write an email, Chris and his blog are immediately brought to the attention of the nearly 300 folks following Ron and the throngs more monitoring related keywords at Twitter Search.
Even better, when I contacted Ron about the link not working properly, he responded personally with a corrected URL:

Chris' presence on Twitter, which he has used strategically in conjunction with the blog to position himself as a thought leader in this area, has paid off. Twitter is now driving traffic to his blog and, more importantly, lending credibility to his practice. This Virginia-based attorney has become a celebrity of sorts on green issues in the Puget Sound legal community, despite the fact that he lives at the complete other end of the country.
Fall is definitely here out in Missoula. On a chilly afternoon, it's time for your roundup of the best posts from across the LexBlogosphere. The topics vary but as with most days over the past couple weeks, there's a few posts on the economy and the ongoing banking crisis.
We're doing a beer for bloggers get together Monday evening in New York City.
I may be attending a book signing with Walter Olson at the Harvard Club. Connolly's works well as it's a couple blocks away.
On Tuesday evening I'm presenting as part of a panel on law blogs at the New York City Bar Association that runs from 6 to 9. Try to attend so we can have some vibrant discussion. I'll be grabbing a beer and/or a bite to eat afterwards with anyone interested.
I'd also enjoy hooking up with anyone during the day on Tuesday or Wednesday. I don't fly back to Seattle until 5 Wednesday. Call me on my cell, 206 321 3627, email me, or send a message via Twitter
Sunday morning and Scott Greenfield is kicking out another gem. Today it's applying the adage, anything worth doing is worth doing right, to professionalism and the solo lawyer.
The dilemma per Greenfield.
One of the first observations one has of Biglaw is that they look professional. They look good. From their yellow pads to their redwelds with their firm name on the top, they exude professionalism. They always have pristine looking exhibit tabs at the bottom of their papers, and even their 32 file copies of papers use original bluebacks. They look good.For the solo, these things can present issues. Everything costs money, and somebody has to pay that money to get the good stuff. For the solo, there's no diffusion of expense, spread around 3000 partners and associates so that no one feels like it comes out of their personal pocket. They can spend like drunken sailors without the slightest concern that it will reduce their take-home at all. Solos feel differently.
Every expense comes straight off the bottom line. We pay it. We feel it. It's our net revenue that pays the price of some fancy legal pad. And as every solo knows, the name on the top of the legal pad doesn't make the writing on the page any more insightful. We follow the sage advice of Benjamin Franklin that a penny saved is a penny earned.
But to misconstrue frugality 'to mean that [you] can present [yourself] as a low rent operation' is a grievous mistake per Greenfield.
Being solo has no correlation with being unprofessional. I've seen many friends slide down that slippery slope of trying to save money at the expense of maintaining as professional a practice as any Biglaw firm in Manhattan. The two are not mutually exclusive.Much of the appearance of professionalism comes at a relatively high cost (such as redwelds with your name on them) relative to their benefit. But that doesn't mean that you should walk into court with a plain manila folder with ragtag papers hanging out of both sides and scribbles covering the front and back. Save the worthless cost of vanity printing, but get the tools necessary to walk into the courtroom with the same professional appearance as any big firm lawyer. This isn't frivolous, but a critical piece of the providing the representation your clients rightfully expect.
While there is truth to the proposition that appearances have no inherent correlation with competence or quality of representation, appearances do impact perception, including the judge and adversary, as well as the client and his family and friends. If you go to court in a shabby, tattered, ill-fitting poly-blend suit, with black Nike referee-sneakers where shoes ought to be, you will be treated as you deserve. You may be sufficiently well-known despite your sartorial challenges to overcome the deficit, but you will most assuredly not receive the same immediate respect given a lawyer walking into a courtroom who looks like a million bucks. If you think this false, you're deluding
Sam applies with blogs and other marketing you're doing. Championing that you're able to practice law for minimal expense while having a blog that exudes 'I did this myself' is penny wise and pound foolish. Let alone shouting to the world 'I don't know what I am doing using a blog.'
Ask yourself a few questions.
I was in a small law firm for 17 years in rural Wisconsin. Didn't take me a week to realize some lawyers looked like 'hobbyists.' They weren't as concerned as I with how they dressed, the staff they hired, the quality of their advertising, their office, the briefcase they carried, the car they drove, or even the house they lived in.
Right or wrong, growing up in a small town I always equated some of those things with professionalism. I realized if I acted like a professional while doing some good 'lawyering,' I would succeed as a lawyer. Success being defined in part as reasonable standard of living for my family and I, doing the legal work I liked, and representing clients I enjoyed.
Because of the low cost of professional Internet related work, you have an edge on those of us who practiced before the Internet became such a great equalizer. Take advantage of it.
It was a huge week for launches. With a lot of help from the attorneys who write them, we were able to take five new blogs live this week. On top of that, one of our most popular blogs—Marler Blog—saw a redesign. All of these blogs look great and so does the content. Many of these blogs are already off and running with multiple insightful posts.
As mentioned, we were also able to take the redesigned version of Marler Blog live this week. Marler Blog is published Bill Marler and other food poisoning lawyers at Marler Clark. The blog does an excellent job of bringing together great content from across their network of food safety blogs.
I try to keep these roundups as fresh as possible by varying the blogs and authors I feature; however, some of the mainstays keep getting stronger and stronger. Today, ACSBlog details where Joe Biden and Sarah Palin stand on the First Amendment. Also, Daniel Schwartz has a great post on laws and issues employers should think about as our economy struggles.
Probably not a surprise that affluent people use the Internet more often and for longer. Those earning over $250,000 spend 60% more time on the Internet than watching television.

Patsi Krakoff turned me onto these survey results by Ipsos Mendelsohn and reported by eMarketer.com.
For lawyers, this increases the need to have an effective Internet presence.
Effective does not just mean ranking at the top of Google. Can these folks pick up on your talent, intellect, and your legal philosophy? Can they see other folks citing what you're saying? Can they see your growing network via LinkedIn and other social media?
For people like me who spend time on the net checking out service providers I'm considering hiring this is the type of info I'm looking for.
And for $250,000 a year for me, my wife wishes it were anywhere close.
A chief marketing officer for a large law firm back East asked me today for a quick top 10 mistakes law firms make when it comes to law blogs.
As with writing a letter, I didn't have time to write a short one so I wrote a long list.
So when going it alone on a law blog where your butt and the reputation of your law firm is on the line ask yourself one question. 'Do you feel lucky?'
It was a very slow day of posting today, maybe it had something to do with the start of playoff baseball. The Cubbies going down 1-0 has left LexBlog a little tense. Anyway, here are your ten best posts from the LexBlogosphere.
As part of formulating LexBlog's plan on the use of Twitter for client service, Stacey Merrick, our Client Services Director, discovered this article by BusinessWeek's Rachael King about major corporate brands using Twitter for customer service.
Companies have figured out Twitter provides the opportunity to listen to what customers are saying about their brands, and to respond. Still, it’s not easy for a corporation to strike the right tone on Twitter. Some brands on Twitter seem too formal and stilted while others seem interested in using it only as a one-way PR channel. And then there’s the delicate issue of corporations following unsuspecting customers and responding to their complaints about brands. Even though the intentions are good, it might be a bit startling for customers to find out the folks from the brand are eavesdropping on their tweets.
Twitter allows anyone, including companies, to send brief text updates to groups of people who have signed up to "follow" their messages. In addition Twitter Search, just like Google's Blog Search does for blogs, allows anyone to monitor keywords and key phrases, including your company name, to hear what people are 'twittering' about.
Looking at the number of people they're following, the number following them, and the number of updates, King identified the companies using Twitter well.
Companies, including law firms, need to understand that Twitter users are the 'super amplifiers.' Easy to say, 'heck they only have 500 or 600 Twitter followers, we've got 2,500 subscribers to our pdf emails and we know who those recipients are.' But those followers have 500 or 600 followers who also have 500 or 600 followers and so on and so on.
All day long people Tweet their displeasures and the small surprises in life.
Word spreads like wild fire on Twitter. First to followers, then onto followers of followers, then onto bloggers, then onto the person on the street, and then onto the main stream media.
Look for the LexBlog customer support Twitter feed coming to your neighborhood soon.
Related post:
It's an amazing afternoon out in Missoula, MT as it's time to do the daily roundup of the best posts from around the LexBlogosphere. There were several posts about the bailout and the ongoing economic turmoil. Most notably: Max Kennerly uses his entertaining writing style in a post on the lesson lawyers should learn from the failed bailout.
Last month FindLaw Lawyer Marketing was caught selling links to law firm websites, a violation of Google's guidelines and a practice considered unethical SEO - search engine optimization.
Rather than acknowledge its errors, FindLaw responded that it did not sell links to law firm websites. FindLaw said the story of selling links arose out of FindLaw sales literature leaked to the public about a FindLaw product called SEM - Corporate. It was that product purportedly pitched by FindLaw to corporations such as Avvo and JD Supra which involved the sale of links.
Typical of FindLaw's response given to lawyers, its employees, and the media, including the Wall Street Journal, is this statement given by FindLaw spokesman John Shaughnessy to the National Law Journal's Pamela MacLean.
.png)
What FindLaw did not say is that FindLaw had been selling a similar product to law firms called SEM Advantage. Presumably standing for 'Search Engine Marketing.'
I've received a copy of promotional information on SEM Advantage, apparently distributed to FindLaw's salespeople in sales meetings this last Winter at Tucson's Star Pass Resort. The literature clearly identifies the product as SEM Advantage, making no mention of 'SEM-Corporate.'
.png)
The literature clearly defines the customer of the product as law firms.
What's included in this sale to law firms? Inbound links tops the list.
.png)
FindLaw websites top the list of websites on which FindLaw will place the links to law firms.
.png)
What do those links look like? In many cases, like the 100 links to law firm websites below the footer of this FindLaw Legal Connection web page. Links placed clearly not to provide greater visibility to law firms by the links being clicked on, but links sold by FindLaw to provide what's called 'Google Juice' to the law firm websites.
.png)
I suppose FindLaw could say the sale of links was only one of four things being sold to law firms as part of SEM Advantage. I don't know.
What do you think? Do you think FindLaw was being truthful in its denial of selling links to law firms?
Related Posts:
» more
» more
Is RSS MAD missing something? Tell us about new feeds here.