What Does Blogging Tell Us About Academic Departments?

As a nascent--and not terribly good--blogger, I've noticed that there are a lot of really interesting and active blogs by legal academics but very few from political scientists. In fact, there are so many law-themed blogs that I find it rather difficult to keep up with them. I check in on four or five regularly (Balkinization, Volokh Conspiracy, Legal Theory Blog, Sports Law Blog, and Concurring Opinons) but there must be thirty or so that I don't bother to read because of their specific areas of focus (e.g. health law). If one searches for a political science blog to compare to, say, Balkinization, one is likely to encounter a good deal of frustration. PolySigh is a blog that hosts an outstanding cast of contributors (e.g. Paul Frymer, Philip Klinkner, Jacob Hacker, etc.) but the mosts there are very infrequent and tend to be short without much analyses. Stephen Taylor does a nice job at Poliblog. But Poliblog is a one-person show so it lacks some of the flavor that is gained by many voices posting to one blog. (Of course, this holds true of The Foul Pole, too.)

So why are blogs run by academic lawyers so much more successful than blogs run by political scientists? A few thoughts:

1. The Community: It may be the legal academy was/is quicker to embrace new technologies and new mediums for communication. Blogs are not journals so their value must be measured in ways different than citations counts, impact scores, etc., which is the way political scientists usually demonstrate their scholarly prowess.

2. Institutional Incentives: Being a good institutionalist, I tend to seek answers in the institution. There has long been an adage that while it is difficult to break into the legal academy, once in, tenure is relatively easy to get. I am not claiming that this is actually true--I have no idea what the tenure standards are in law schools around the country and, as with political science, I'm quite certain there is significant variance from school to school. However, the journals are, largely, not peer reviewed making publication much easier. (And, since I've published in a law review I feel qualified to say that my experience publishing there in was much easier than publishing in a reputable political science journal.) Additionally, the teaching load at your average law school seems to be quite managable. Two/two loads seem commonplace--although this observation is entirely anecdotal. Managable teaching loads mean more time for research and writing and, therefore, more time for posting to a blog.

3. Finally, I should note that political scientists have done a poor job of engaging the community. Legal academics are much closer to the public sphere than political scientists. When law professors speak, members of the public (i.e. practicioners, media, etc.) may actually be listening. When political scientists talk, to often we speak only to our students and peers. Thus, blogging may naturally seem quite foreign to a political scientist who could realistically wonder if anyone will read their posts.

Whatever the case, political scientists may yet find that blogging has something to offer. Our academic brethren in the law schools have turned blogging into an fascinating forum for the exchange and development of new ideas. We would be well served to follow their path.


The ability to publish articles more quickly and secure tenure more readily