ABSTRACT
Traditional legal scholarship often comes under fire. Commentators lament that law review articles are too long, too stuffy, too heavily footnoted – just ‘too traditional’. Legal scholars have responded by seeking out less traditional avenues of publication such as online blogs, social media, and op-eds. These also come with attendant risk – lack of nuance, lack of depth, and assertions outside one’s area of expertise. In this article, written for a symposium on the future of legal scholarship, I propose the ‘Goldilocks Path’ of scholarship as an optimal method of spreading knowledge and ideas. This Goldilocks Path lies in a balance between producing traditional and nontraditional pieces. Doing so engages academics and broadens their audience, allowing for more diverse readership, an opportunity to obtain early critique of theories, and a chance for scholarship to create a stronger impact. Walking the multi-outlet path, where the non-traditional enhances the traditional, can facilitate a more meaningful dialogue within the legal community and with the public at large.
Lobel, Orly, The Goldilocks Path of Legal Scholarship in a Digital Networked World (2018) Loyola University Chicago Law Journal, volume 50, no 403, 2018; San Diego Legal Studies Paper No 19-385.
First posted 2019-05-05 09:19:31
Leave a Reply