Lawyers' blogs as advertising?

Reported by the ABA website, a New York proposal would designate lawyers' blogs as advertising.

Huh? That doesn't make any sense to me. I'm thinking that the people who came up with this proposal aren't bloggers and don't understand the nature of blogging. Not too shocking.

One proposed change would require lawyers to file copies of computer-accessed communications with the attorney disciplinary committee in the appropriate judicial department of the state. The revision also would require lawyers to retain copies of all written advertising, including Web sites and communications that may be accessed by computer, for at least one year.

AND this could have huge, huge consequences because of the nature of the internet (civ pro 101, baby):

The proposal, by a committee created by the state’s Administrative Board of Courts, also suggests the state code of professional responsibility extend court jurisdiction to out-of-state legal advertising that appears in New York.

So, by fiat, all websites (including blogs, but not explicitly mentioning them) are advertising, whether or not they are? I'm not entirely clear how this proposal could be implemented. Does it mean that any attorney who blogs about anything legal anywhere must conform to the New York code of professionalism and restrictions on advertising?

WHOA.

And if blogs are advertising, then so must be participation in seminars, speaking on panels and making speeches at conventions, schools, etc. They are different sides of the same coin, pretty much.

Both involve speaking on a topic of personal and (most likely) professional interest. The degree to which the audience values the information imparted depends on the expertise and reputation of the speaker. Both may lead to new contacts -- even new business -- and greater visibility; both have that as their goal. Neither is advertising.