The D.C. Bar Association's magazine, the Washington Lawyer, has an article by Sarah Kellogg about blogging. The article is written, it seems, for those still toying with the idea of starting a weblog.
Here's my view of weblogs. Take your standard legal newspaper, like the Virginia Lawyers' Weekly or the Maryland Daily Record. They all have roughly the same types of articles: current events in the law, case opinion synopses, legal gossip, editorials, and regular columns on subjects like law office technology, legal ethics, or trial practice skills. Most weblogs will fit into one of those pigeonholes. Myself, these days the only opinions I am really interested in are those held by men and women wearing black robes. So I focus on the new cases -- and I think there is a need for that, as the new cases that interest me the most often get little or no interest from the legal newspapers.
If you want to get the full benefit from weblogs, then chose a range of them covering the same categories that you would find in a good legal newspaper in your locality, and subscribe to them in a news aggregator. Then presto, you have created your own customized legal newspaper, staffed by volunteer "stringers". It will not be a substitute to a subscription to a good legal newspaper like the Maryland Daily Record -- are you kidding me? But it will be a valuable supplement to it.
I've already said what little else I have to say about the blogging (just click on the weblogs category on the sidebar if you want to read it).