Cross examining the blogger
Should bloggers be expert witnesses?
Bob Ambrogi, blogger extraordinaire, wades in where angels fear to tread. (yes, metaphor overused…)
Bob has an interesting collection of opinions on the subject.
Nancy Delain, an intellectual property lawyer in Schenectady, N.Y., would never retain an expert who has a blog, she says. But as for her opponent’s expert, “I pray for a blog. Very public, very quippy, very quickly written, very full of possible ways to hang him out to dry in front of the finder of fact.”
For myself, as an author, speaker and blogger, I know that there are things that I say in one context that can come back to haunt a client in another context. I recommend our clients use me as a consulting expert to avoid needing to have attorneys review all of my writing in light of the issue at hand.
In my opinion, blogs are just the tip of the iceberg. LinkedIn, Facebook and other social media, YouTube and boards are other places where an expert can get in trouble.
Yet, when someone asked me for a recommendation for an expert recently, I recommended Craig Ball. Go figure!
Craig’s most recent interview and another expert’s teasing “back at you” feedback (Sharon, indeed!):
In both forensics and EDD, the lure of lucre pulls in people who really ought to be doing something less harmful. Lives, liberty, fortunes, and careers hinge on some computer forensic examinations; yet, some schools and tool sellers promote the notion that you can learn what you need to know over a long weekend. Just as many copy shops decided they were e-discovery experts one dark night, a lot of poorly trained, incurious and careless forensic examiners are popping up all over. I’m frankly appalled by some of what I see out there. Where I hope we ultimately converge is a high standard of professionalism and proven expertise.
Some of us certainly have fun being our authentic selves in this community we call ediscovery.
Filed under Sound Evidence, Technology Counsel.