Full disclosure. Maybe.

This is funny (via Glenn Reynolds).  Still, it's kinda strange that the blogosphere is focused on the coming crypto-pundit invasion, but has wholly missed the enemy already within.  The blogosphere is utterly overrun by lawyers, including yours truly, who are virtual double agents -- and bound as fiduciaries to represent their clients' interests. 

(Incidentally, we lawyers prefer the term "overrun" to "crawling," given that more than 50% of us can stand on our hind legs.)

What's wrong with that, you say?  I guess it depends on the interests that are being represented.  Would you find it pertinent to know that I represent pharmaceutical companies and medical researchers?  Might that might influence how I write about drug patents or stem cell research?  What about the fact that I represent manufacturers who depend on foreign contractors and suppliers?  Could that influence my views on free trade?  Heck, I even help to represent a European manufacturer (based in France of all places) -- exactly what kinda "idiotonic" agenda might I have up my sleeve?

You see how it goes.  I'm fortunate in that my political views largely align with my clients' interests (pro-technology, socially liberal, generally pro-business).  But, if an issue directly affected one of my clients, my views won't matter.  It's the difference between principal and agent.  Regardless of the nuance or brilliance of my advice, at the end of the day I'm a set of hands.

Something to keep in mind -- and not just with me.

UPDATE:  As for my own double-secret agent hood, here's what I posted to Hilzoy in comments:  "This is a personal weblog. It is not a professional outlet. If an issue directly affects one of my clients, I will refrain from blogging it (and have so refrained in the past). "

Comments

[double-plus-ungood]

What's wrong with that, you say? I guess it depends on the interests that are being represented. Would you find it pertinent to know that I represent pharmaceutical companies and medical researchers? Might that might influence how I write about drug patents or stem cell research? What about the fact that I represent manufacturers who depend on foreign contractors and suppliers? Could that influence my views on free trade? Heck, I even help to represent a European manufacturer (based in France of all places) -- exactly what kinda "idiotonic" agenda might I have up my sleeve?

Um, no. I don't care if you've formed biases through employment in certain fields, nor who paid you. I would, however, want to know if you were being directly paid to espouse certain viewpoints on Obsidian Wings.

[hilzoy]

von -- do you regard your fiduciary obligation as allowing you to simply refrain from blogging on issues you have a conflict of interest on, or as requiring you to work to advance your clients' interests in all possible fora, including this one?

[von]

Hilzoy --

Good question. This is a personal weblog. It is not a professional outlet. If an issue directly affects one of my clients, I will refrain from blogging it (and have so refrained in the past).

von

[hilzoy]

I figured; it just occurred to me that I had no idea how far fiduciary obligations went. I mean, I have always assumed that they do not, for instance, obligate you to weigh your every word to your wife/s.o. to see what you could say that would produce the greatest possible benefit to your clients (leaving aside those cases, which I assume happen more often in movies than in real life, in which husband and wife are prosecution and defense in the same case), but I wondered: where is that line drawn? Thanks.

[aireachail]

The link is definitely funny.

Personally, I don't care whether any blogger or contributor has a standing fiduciary obligation to a client, and I wouldn't expect anyone to disclose it.

I make an exception however, when said client is the Administration or any branch of the Gov't. When that's the case, we all should know up front whether our tax money is involved.

[sidereal]

"Regardless of the nuance or brilliance of my advice, at the end of the day I'm a set of hands."

Surely there's some task a client would ask of you that you'd refuse on principle.

[Josh]

Surely there's some task a client would ask of you that you'd refuse on principle.

"There are some things a rat just won't do..."

[Brad DeLong]

Ha! I for one, am contractually bound to "use [my] best efforts to participate in the promotion and marketing of... The Atlantic Monthly by making reference to... The Atlantic Monthly in settings including, but not limited to, articles or books written by or about you or the Work, interviews, editorials, press conferences, press releases, television appearances, Internet Web sites maintained and operated by you, and any other media available for the promotion of the Work to which you have access."

So, completely seriously, you all should immediately go and subscribe to The Atlantic Monthly so that you can read the excellent Stephen S. Cohen and J. Bradford DeLong (2005), "Shaken and Stirred," The Atlantic Monthly January/February 2005, plus many other articles of equal or greater excellence and value. What The Atlantic Monthly publishes by Mark Bowden, James Fallows, Robert D. Kaplan, and William Langewiesche alone is easily worth ten times its subscription price.

[fdl]

true enough, professor dL. and for the record, your blog is worth easily 10 times what you charge for it.

josh, don't forget the part about the scientists getting more attached to the rats . . .

sidereal, the State of California was very nice to balance my fiduciary duty of zealous advocacy with a duty as an officer of the court to uphold the dignity of the bar.

[hey, no snickering . . . i mean it.]

so when asked to commit crimes or commit unsavory acts, i get to decline.

Francis

[von]

So, completely seriously, you all should immediately go and subscribe to The Atlantic Monthly so that you can read the excellent Stephen S. Cohen and J. Bradford DeLong (2005), "Shaken and Stirred," The Atlantic Monthly January/February 2005, plus many other articles of equal or greater excellence and value. What The Atlantic Monthly publishes by Mark Bowden, James Fallows, Robert D. Kaplan, and William Langewiesche alone is easily worth ten times its subscription price.

Snark aside, I'd second DeLong's recomendation. My key reads are The Economist, The Atlantic Monthly, The New Yorker, and Sky & Telescope.* (The Weekly Standard will probably, someday, be added to the mix for balance.)

von

*I'm making a switch from Astronomy, which is too People-magazine glossy.

[von]

Surely there's some task a client would ask of you that you'd refuse on principle.

Sure. Believe it or not, but lawyers are constrained by all kinds of ethical rules and duties (we're good at making those things). I take those very seriously. (I also have some freedom in who I choose to represent.)

[DaveL]

I do subscribe to the Atlantic and I will be more than happy to read your article when it finally gets here. In the meantime, I HATE reading blog posts about interesting-looking articles and then having to wait another week (or two or three) for the magazine in question to find its way across the Pacific to Hawaii. I think they send them via the Panama Canal from a printing plant in New Jersey.