April 2004

Bar News Survey — The Results Are In!

Bar News reader survey shows members mostly like their magazine, and have plenty of ideas for improving it.

by Lindsay Thompson

A year and a half ago the Board of Governors (BOG) created a committee to look into Bar News's continued relevance to readers in a new century. In particular, they told the group to consider (1) whether the editor should be an independent lawyer or a WSBA employee; (2) whether the magazine should be published less often; and (3) whether it should become a more or mostly Internet-based publication.

The committee's members were WSBA President David Savage, who acted as chair; WSBA Governors Rob Boggs, Joni Kerr, and Fawn Sharp; Washington Young Lawyers Division Representative Paul Richmond; WSBA Executive Director Jan Michels; WSBA Deputy Director Paula Littlewood; WSBA Director of Member and Community Relations Judy Berrett; and yours truly. The committee members worked hard and met frequently.
 
The editor's role
The first thing they had to decide was whether the editor should be an independent contractor or a WSBA employee. While a dozen practicing lawyers have edited Bar News since 1947, the WSBA is in a tiny minority of state bar associations doing it that way. Far more common is having a staff person, usually with a journalism background, edit the magazine. While the committee considered the matter in 2003, I served as interim editor on a temporary basis.

In the end the committee felt the current system works well, and recommended it be retained. The Editorial Advisory Board and BOG agreed, and I was hired as editor in September 2003.

The survey 
To help them consider their other charges, the committee members took an innovative step: it asked Bar News readers what they think about the magazine. They asked the BOG to fund the hiring of GMA Research in Bellevue to develop a telephone survey of enough WSBA members to get an accurate sense of what you think about the magazine, what you like and don't like, and what you'd like to see different. The survey was also designed to develop demographic and other information to help sell the advertising that supports all of the magazine's direct costs.

Several hundred WSBA members took 10 to 15 minutes in November and December to answer the survey's questions. More filled out and mailed in the version we ran in Bar News. Every answer was read and the results compiled.
 
The results
Here's what you told us:

Seventy-four percent of WSBA members read Bar News always or usually. You read Bar News more than any other legal publication, including ABA Journal (28 percent); Washington Law & Politics (15 percent); King County Bar Bulletin (nine percent); WSTLA's Trial News (eight percent); and the Oregon State Bar Bulletin (six percent). A third of respondents rely on Bar News alone for legal news.

A majority of you gave Bar News a "good" rating — 3.4 on a scale of 1 to 5. You rated the magazine 3.6 for appearance/design; 3.5 for readability; 3.2 for overall content; 3.0 for interest, and 2.9 for usefulness.

You said you like the disciplinary notices the best of Bar News sections (3.8), followed by feature articles (3.5), "Around the State" (3.2), "FYI" (3.1), and letters and the editor's page (3.0 each).

Besides what you like, the survey also asked what you'd like to see that's not there. Among the ideas you mentioned is more coverage of new developments in the law (4.0); ethics coverage (3.8); substantive areas of law and practice tips (3.7); local news (3.3); profiles of WSBA members and technology coverage (3.2 each); and access to justice matters (3.0).

Fifty-seven percent of readers surveyed like the magazine in its current format; 77 percent think monthly publication works best. Forty-eight percent of you think Bar News should come out on paper still, but with expanded content on the Internet. Seventy-eight percent of you consider the magazine to be as good as or better than other legal publications you read.

Many readers took extra time to provide individual comments as well as answering the survey questions. A number thanked the committee for asking what members thought, for a change. Others expressed some sympathy for the task of trying to satisfy a readership as diverse as the WSBA's.

Others offered more specific ideas.

Some members think disciplinary notices are too long, others think they aren't long enough. The committee bounced around the idea of running a short abstract of the notices in the magazine, with a longer text on the Bar News website. One advantage of doing that is that it may free the time of a WSBA staff member to do other things; the downside is that not everyone uses the Internet, and only about a third of you look at Bar News on the Internet as is. We'd like to know more of what you think about this: please e-mail me at tradelaw@thompson-law.com.

You also said you'd like to see more practice checklists, practice-oriented articles, historical pieces, more on legal ethics, shorter letters to the editor and shorter substantive articles, and more about government lawyers and in-house counsel.
 
We need your help
Some of these things we are already working on; in those cases it's nice to know we're on the right track. Others we need help on. Because Bar News depends on readers for articles, if you believe an area or point of view is not appearing enough, contact me about getting something in the magazine.

Meeting in January, the Bar News Review Committee voted to make a final report to the BOG in February and disband. The survey results were given to the Editorial Advisory Board, with whom I will work to act on more of them in the coming year.

And keep in mind you can give us your opinion anytime: just write or call. We listen to them all with gratitude.

____________________

Lindsay Thompson is the editor of Bar News. For some other readers' comments, see page 64.

Back to table of contents >>