The UK’s Top Legal Tweeters in October 2011: A personal view
7 October 2011
Related Articles
Opinion: Twitter is more than just a fad, so don’t miss the boat
14 March 2011
Twitter. Just the very name sounds stupid doesn't it?
17 November 2011
How to lose followers on Twitter – a helpful guide for lawyers and legal journalists
10 August 2012
Right to reply
25 November 2010
Opinion
9 October 2000
Who are the top legal Twitter accounts? Well, one instructive way of answering – which also has limitations - is to look at who has the most followers.

One feature of Twitter is that those with accounts – “tweeters” – can accumulate followers over time. However, the number of such followers does not demonstrate, for example, whether it is an especially useful or entertaining account. Nor does it prove that the Tweeter in question has any “real world” significance. All it shows is that other tweeters – from experts and the curious to the hordes of automated marketing and porn “bots” – have selected an account to follow for whatever reason. So a high follower count by itself may not be impressive, and nor is a low follower count a disgrace. Indeed, some good legal tweeters still have only a dozen or so followers, and not the hundreds of thousands following the banal tweets of some celebrity tweeter.
All that said, there are certain Twitter accounts which have become more popular than others. And a look at the current leading UK individual legal tweeters – the nine or so with more than 3,500 followers – reveals a rather interesting diversity as to what actually makes a “legal” Twitter account one which a relatively large number of other tweeters want to follow. It also reveals something about the individual “legal” Twitter accounts that are not attracting that many followers.
In particular, very few of the self-consciously “business development” accounts – individual lawyers using Twitter just to promote their practices – seem to be getting much traction in building up their so-called “social media profiles”. Just as nature abhors a vacuum, it would seem legal tweeting abhors over-commercial phonies.
The UK legal tweeters currently with the most followers turn out to be a mixed bunch. They include the two established and accomplished legal bloggers @babybarista http://twitter.com/#!/babybarista, now of the Guardian (7,462 followers), and @Charonqc http://twitter.com/#!/Charonqc (5,940 followers), the latter widely and rightly regarded as the doyen of British legal blogging. And showing perhaps the influence of “old media” there are the widely-quoted media lawyer Mark Stephens (@MarksLarkshttp://twitter.com/#!/MarksLarks, 4,946 followers), the famous legal journalist (and relative newcomer to Twitter) @JoshuaRozenberg http://twitter.com/#!/JoshuaRozenberg (4,422 followers), and the barrister and media pundit @John_Cooper_QC http://twitter.com/#!/John_Cooper_QC (3,715 followers).
There is also the remarkable @afuahirsch http://twitter.com/#!/afuahirsch (5,856 followers), the Guardian’s legal affairs correspondent, as much at ease with a print column as with a speedily-posted multi-linked blogpost. Indeed, more than any other legal tweeter, Afua is constantly bridging the gap between old and new media in high-quality legal news reporting.
Then there are tweeters with no real established blogging presence or “old media” connections, who nonetheless have built up large followings just by explaining the law and the legal process to lay people: the excellent Emily Goodhand of Reading University (@copyrightgirl http://twitter.com/#!/copyrightgirl , 5,095 followers), the rising star of the human rights bar, @AdamWagner1
http://twitter.com/#!/AdamWagner1 (3,938 followers), and the estimable @_millymoo
http://twitter.com/#!/_millymoo (3,595 followers). Emily is not legally trained, though her grasp of copyright law is phenomenal, as is her ability to explain it. Adam and Milly are particularly adept in taking emerging news stories and explaining how the media or political narratives often do not match up to solid legal analysis.
Interestingly, neither full-time lawyers nor full-time journalists dominate the nine legal tweeters so far mentioned. Only three are currently practising full time as lawyers – John Cooper and Adam Wagner as barristers, and Mark Stephens as a solicitor, and merely two are full-time journalists – Afua Hirsch and Joshua Rozenberg. And one may note three of the nine mentioned are female (including two of the top five by follower count), as are many other outstanding legal tweeters.
There are also many other individual legal tweeters – currently with fewer followers than those mentioned above – who should be followed by anyone with an interest in legal matters. These range from the in-house insights of @LegalBizzle http://twitter.com/#!/LegalBizzle , @in_house_lawyer http://twitter.com/#!/in_house_lawyer and @legalbrat http://twitter.com/#!/legalbrat , to the detailed legal commentary of @carlgardner http://twitter.com/#!/carlgardner and @Familoo http://twitter.com/#!/Familoo .
All these legal tweeters have one thing in common. They engage and inform. They participate in online discussions and they converse with other tweeters. For them, their Twitter account is not a “channel” for traditional marketing practices. Twitter is instead a means by which legal affairs can be properly explained and discussed with the world at large.
Twitter provides a poor “return on investment” for cynical lawyers and related professionals who just want to expand their internet presence as a commercial end in itself. Indeed, such folk should probably do other things than waste time in trying to develop a Twitter account which then languishes with a few dozen followers at best. But for any lawyer, legal journalist, or indeed anyone with an interest in the law, who wants to take the time to explain the law and legal matters with expertise and clarity, Twitter offers a means to not only become popular but also a way to promote the public understanding of law.
David Allen Green (@davidallengreen http://twitter.com/#!/DavidAllenGreen ) is media correspondent of The Lawyer
View results 10 per page | 20 per page


Readers' comments (12)
Law Think | 7-Oct-2011 5:55 pm
I'm still undecided about Twitter as a means of legal debate, for the sole reason of the limit in characters. If you want to make a decent point, you will always have to cut out words/characters which inevitably limits clarity of expression. But as I say I'm undecided - if you've had a geniuine and intelligent legal debate on Twitter please say how!
I've preferred having debates on our Law Think blog via the comments section (e.g. http://www.lawthink.co.uk/2011/03/ecj-ruling-car-insurance-discrimination/ ) - this then actually allows some expression without any character limit.
But if you want to prove us wrong we are at @lawthinkuk (1,594 followers) ;)
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 8-Oct-2011 6:26 am
David is too modest, obviously, to mention that he has over 18,000 followers!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 8-Oct-2011 7:08 pm
I think a list of top legal tweeters is not complete without the inclusion of the author who seems to have forgotten about his 18 and half thousand followers
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 9-Oct-2011 6:57 pm
Completely pointless an utter rubbish. Start as you mean to go on Dave, there's a good boy.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
David Allen Green | 11-Oct-2011 9:01 pm
I have added an addendum to this post at Jack of Kent, just for those who take it too seriously
http://jackofkent.blogspot.com/2011/10/top-legal-tweetersoh-dear.html
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Brian Inkster | 13-Oct-2011 4:35 pm
Readers of this article should be aware that "a personal view" did not appear in the headline when originally published. This was added by The Lawyer after I published, on The Time Blawg:-
http://thetimeblawg.com/2011/10/11/the-lawyer-excludes-scotland-and-top-twegals-from-uk-legal-twitter-list-twitteratigate2/
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Rod | 14-Oct-2011 5:55 pm
Surely this is not purely about numbers, but about influence. That is, the people who are most influencial – as David alluded to in his article – do not necessarily have the largest followings….or for that matter the biggest bruised egos.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Geoff | 14-Oct-2011 7:28 pm
What alot of pointless tosh
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
James Davies | 22-Dec-2011 2:47 am
The listing does mention the most influential voices in legal matters as far as the media in general is concerned, however, a great following does not mean great content. There are a number of new twitter users who have less of a follower base but have almost singlehandedly created much buzz amongst the younger users. I would like to add the names of @legalaware to the above as well as @legalbizzle. One of the most comprehensive legal posters from October to December would be the account maintained by @thelawmap focusing on all aspects of UK law and major legal issues across the world. The daily database of law news created by these tweeters often provide a complete picture of what had happened in a day within the legal sector. I enjoy the personalised comments by @TooManyBlueys and the left-leaning tweets from @Liza_Harding very much. These two are great weekend tweeters as well. Although at present I have found myself harking back to full tweets page of @TheLawMap for more of an instant and quick access to what is going on in law. What must be noted in the case of some of these tweeters is that they seem to post legal news items before they have been reported elsewhere! Perhaps that is the wonder of social media!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Anonymous | 29-Dec-2011 2:14 pm
oh dear. Name dropping alert.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment