Monday, October 23, 2006

ANOTHER DAVID LAT PROFILE

Over at Above the Law, that new lawyer blawg website, they posted another profile of lead blogger David Lat that appeared elsewhere.

Noticed that it mentioned that after leaving his big firm that he tried going the Hollywood talent agent route. He actually worked not in LA, but in New York in the agent training program for a summer; actually, he worked in the mailroom. You may be surprised to hear that it's actually commonplace for these talent agencies to make law school grads start in the mailroom. You would think this would seem to be a real waste of, ahem, talent. But that's how these agencies operate, they make everyone start at the bottom and are able to get away with this, because so many people want to be in showbiz. Eventually people rise out of the mailroom to work as assistants so there is a light at the end of the tunnel, I think. But it's a long grind and a lot of hard work. I don't know why these agencies want to force people to start in the mailroom. I think it turns lots of talented people right off. A lot of people would be tempted to chuck the agency route entirely if this is what they have to do to start out, work in a mailroom. It sounds just terrible, but that's what you gotta do to become an agent and eventually put your law degree to good use.

Lat tried this route out, but then he got a federal prosecutor's job offer in Newark, New Jersey for more money. So he decided to give law one more shot before he eventually chucked it to turn his attention to writing and blogging. Interesting. But as I say, I think it's really sad when talented law school grads decide to chuck legal careers or even law-related careers at talent agencies to go into blogging--- even if it's legal blogging. And it's all because the legal field sucks and the hours are too long, and the people you work with are generally horrible uptights. But that's law for you.

And there was a story floating around out there about some of these political pundits. I'll get around to linking to it later.

UPDATE: Here it is. It was in the Wall Street Journal. I guess I'm linking to this because I've been a "pundit" myself, though in print, not on air--- and on a very minor league scale.

No comments: