Technology

Do We Even Need Legal Tech Journalists? A Response To Bob Ambrogi

Okay, so the market is light on legal tech journalists, but does that matter?

By  
on

lawyer-technology-legal-tech-300x207 (1)Bob Ambrogi, he of legal tech blogger fame, published a post recently in which he asked an important question, “Where are the legal tech journalists?” The post is excellent, especially if you’re cynical about legal tech to begin with, and I recommend you read the full thing.

But on this I agree with Bob: at the moment, coverage of legal tech by professional journalists has “nearly evaporated.” But why is that the case and why does it matter? My sense from reading Bob’s post is that he believes it does matter, while I am less sure.

But, first, let’s deal with the “why.”

For comparison, I find it useful to think about fintech, which is covered regularly by mainstream publications like The New York Times, Wall Street Journal and 60 Minutes, as a point of comparison. Because the fact is that there are legal tech journalists everywhere. They write for TechCrunch, VentureBeat or any other news site that covers technology and disruptive businesses. Don’t believe me? Here’s an article in TechCrunch on Everlaw receiving an investment from Andreessen Horowitz, and here is a similar article reporting Zapproved’s most recent funding round. The thing about these publishers is that, unlike ATL, they only cover funding rounds, big exits or something equally sexy.

So why all the love for fintech and stepchild treatment for legal tech? Because, quite frankly, legal tech isn’t sexy. But this could change. If big firms start breaking up as a result of disruptive technology or alternative legal service providers like Thomson Reuters, then everyone in the mainstream media will cover the industry, in much the same way it does fintech or Uber for that matter. But, at the moment, legal tech companies are building tools that allow big firms and corporate legal departments to function like cutting edge businesses, not in order to topple them. I don’t think this is anyone’s fault in particular, it’s just that you can’t expect coverage of an industry from professional journalists if there is no audience. Fintech has an audience that legal tech does not.

Which brings us to the “so what?” Okay, so the market is light on legal tech journalists, but does that matter? First of all, to pretend that the legal tech coverage produced by journalists is categorically better may be naïve. It would be foolish to ignore the fact that the companies covered by the mainstream tech press are so often the ones who are funded by top VC firms that maintain connections with many of the top reporters. It’s not a coincidence that every company coming out of Y Combinator will have its launch covered by tech reporters.

Second of all, and obviously I am biased here, but people who are writing about legal technology with a definite business angle, might actually be a better source of information. And make no mistake about it, I am not a journalist. And any tech company who I’ve met with can tell you that I constantly reiterate the fact that I am CEO of a startup, not a journalist. Moreover, I have written about companies that have later become customers of ours for sponsored conversations. Again, not a journalist.

Sponsored

This is not simply me admitting my bias and then doing my best to overcome it, this is allowing bias to function as my greatest asset. I write about companies and trends that I think are going to be big and impact the market. These are the very same companies and trends that lawyers want to hear about. But, for my own selfish reasons, I naturally gravitate to those companies that I think are going to be in it for the long haul because, among other things, companies that will make it big and last a long time are better customers. Selfishness can be a great filter. If I write about your company, keep in touch with you and follow your progress, it’s because I think you’re great or on your path to greatness. The same is true if I pitch you on a campaign. To use a terrible comparison: reading my posts is like asking a professional pick-up artist to identify the best looking women in the club.

So how do I stay objective? First, I continue to write about all companies, not just our customers and, second, by publishing conversations rather than opinion columns, I am able to remain at arm’s length. Because conversations, by their very nature, have multiple voices, the format allows for challenging assumptions and dissenting positions.

Some of my most trusted sources for legal tech news and trends are business people like Ron Friedman from Fireman & Co., Darren Heitner from Heitner Legal, Joe Borstein from Thomson Reuters, Mary Redzic from Disrupt.Legal and Bob Ambrogi, who is an ambassador for Catalyst. Will legal tech ultimately achieve mainstream status and the kind of journalistic coverage that comes along with it? Maybe. But, until then, the information and analysis will still be pretty great, maybe even better. Speaking of Bob Ambrogi, I’ve invited Bob via ReplyAll to respond to this post and you can follow our conversation as it unfolds by clicking below.

Sponsored

Zach Abramowitz is a former Biglaw associate and currently CEO and co-founder of ReplyAll. You can follow Zach on Twitter (@zachabramowitz) or reach him by email at zach@replyall.me.

CRM Banner

Topics

, , , ,