Kevin O’Keefe commented today about an article in the ABA Journal suggesting that social media for lawyers is dangerous. As proof, the article cites bone-headed lawyer moves such as blogging about a Judge and calling her “a witch,” “mentally unfit,” and “unfit for her position”; an assistant public defender revealing confidential information about cases she was working on online; and, ex parte communication via Facebook between a judge and an attorney appearing before him.

For attorneys like this, yes, social media is dangerous. But so is the Postal Service, fax machines, email, and courtroom hallways. Lawyers with poor ethical grounding or loose lips are a danger anywhere they are allowed to speak.

It’s true that social media gives lawyers even more ways to show their ignorance or lack of discretion. But that doesn’t mean we need new rules restricting its use. So says Mr. O’Keefe and I agree, as I’ve written before.

In fact, couldn’t we make the case that what’s really dangerous is the idea of restricting social media? Aside from it being an assault on freedom of speech, it would be an assault on the use of common sense. Putting extraordinary limits on attorneys’ use of social media might give readers a false sense of trust in what they read online. I don’t know about you but I don’t want to live in a world where people think, “I saw it on Facebook so it must be true.”