Category: Media

To Satisfy New Search Algorithms, Legal Websites Need Quality Content

The success of a law-firm website is determined by how many clients and potential clients visit the site, spend time there and take action based on what they discover.

Over the years, law-firm marketers focused on keyword and link strategies to enhance search engine results and increase traffic to their websites.  While these are still valuable tools, recent developments in the search universe have shifted the emphasis to content strategy.

Quality content includes well-written articles, blog posts, videos, webcasts, presentation slide decks, infographics, eBooks and white papers.  Quality content addresses client needs.

Sixty-seven percent of the time, online searchers use Google to find what they are looking for.  To provide the best results, Google is constantly tweaking its search algorithm. (An algorithm is a process or set of rules to be used by a computer in calculations or other problem-solving operations.)  These algorithms are designed to maintain search engine integrity and punish violators.

Sara Downey Robinson and Chris Davis discussed the changing landscape of digital marketing and search engine optimization at the monthly meeting of the Rocky Mountain Chapter of the Legal Marketing Association, held May 13 at Guard and Grace in LoDo Denver.

Davis is business development director at Burns Marketing, a full-service B2B marketing agency that combines traditional and digital marketing to help clients drive demand.   Robinson is marketing coordinator at Inflow, a top inbound-marketing firm specializing in search.

Panda, Penguin and Hummingbird

Panda and Penguin are two major changes to the existing Google algorithm made in 2011 and 2012, respectively.   In 2013, Google released a totally new algorithm called Hummingbird (which incorporates and enhances the updates made by Panda and Penguin).  These three developments have completely changed the way law firms must look at search.

“Law-firm sites that regularly showed up on page one now find themselves on page 20,” said Robinson.  “Since searchers rarely go beyond the second page of results in an online search, this is a real problem.”

Google Panda focuses on keywords.  Sites with keyword “stuffing” are demoted or flagged as spam.  Panda also penalizes low-quality content, thin content, duplicate content and the amount of advertising compared with the amount of useful content on a site.

Google Penguin focuses on links.  It focuses on “black hat” tactics like links that come from poor-quality sites, from sites that aren’t topically relevant to a target market, paid links, and links where the anchor text is overly optimized (exact-match anchor text).  Use natural language in your links, and vary it.

“Quality inbound links are not found at garage sales, “said Robinson.  “Steer clear of link farms.  A few high-quality, carefully developed links perform much better than a large number of weak, irrelevant links.  It takes time and perhaps a dedicated staff person to develop and nurture quality links.”

The new Google Hummingbird algorithm looks for a steady stream of high-quality, relevant content and natural language on webpages – and rewards those who provide it.  Hummingbird attempts to decipher a search engine query by using the context of a question rather than the specific keywords within the question.  Thin content, keyword stuffing and lack of relevant content will cause significant demotions.

“Content marketing is a technique that creates and distributes valuable, relevant and consistent content to attract and acquire a clearly defined audience,” said  Davis, “with the objective of driving profitable customer action.”

Identify client personas and clarify their needs

Before a law firm can create relevant content, it needs to know with whom it is communicating.  In marketing talk, this is called the “user persona” – or target market.

“In user-centered design and marketing, personas are user types that might use a legal service in a similar way,” said Davis.  “A small law firm might target one user persona.  A large law firm will target numerous user personas.”

One law-firm user persona might be high-income individuals going through divorce.  Another might be small businesses in need of venture capital.  Another might be large medical equipment manufacturers facing product liability lawsuits.  The more specific the persona, the more specific a law firm’s content can be.  Relevant content will answer the questions these users are asking, using natural language.

A user personal is a representation of the goals and behavior of a hypothesized group of users.  In most cases, personas are synthesized from data collected from user interviews.

“An effective law firm website will focus not on the firm’s capabilities, but on the identified needs of a persona or personas,” said Davis.  “It will use industry- or interest-specific terminology within a context familiar to the targeted persona.”

Create relevant content

Law firms that want to prevent or correct loss of search engine result page rankings and traffic should publish meaningful, original content on a regular basis.  The goal is content that will establish a firm, practice group or lawyer as a though leader in an area relevant to a user persona.

“Take the time to discover the common questions your clients have, and provide the answers to these questions,” said Davis.  “Relevant content can be written, but it also can and should be visual.  Video content posted on YouTube (which is owned by Google) is particularly powerful as ‘Google juice.’”

Instead of using keywords like “car accident,” use more specific terms like “car accident lawsuit” or “car accident insurance”, or better yet natural language terms like “What should I do if I am sued for a DUI car accident?” or “What should I look for when buying car insurance for an older vehicle?”  Think in terms of full-fledged questions that a person might ask Siri on a smartphone.

Once search brings users to a law firm’s site, there must be a way to create and nurture a relationship and convert the potential client into a real client over time.  Each item of posted content should contain a call to action – some way for the user to interact with the site so that the firm can capture data.  This could be a way to comment on a white paper or download information about an upcoming event.

Use analytics to measure success

“Take advantage of Google Analytics to collect data that can be used to improve the quality of your webpages – adding more of what works and eliminating what does not,” said Robinson.  “In Google Analytics, which is currently free, law firms can set up specific goals to study how users are entering and interacting with your website.”

Google Analytics lets a law firm know which content is most-viewed and acted upon, so that similar content can be added.  It lets the firm know which content is ignored, so that it can be eliminated or improves.  It lets a firm know the exact path users take through its site, so that adjustments can be made to create a better user experience.

If observation and analytics show that a law firm website is not getting the results it wants, an audit can help determine the source of the problem, take steps to fix the problem, measure the results of these steps, and look for any others areas that could be improved.

“Increasing inbound traffic to your website is not magic – it is a combination of art and science,” said Robinson.  “You should select any agency that makes you feel comfortable and uses language that is easy to understand.  You should never feel intimidated.

“At the same time, do not expect miracles,” said Robinson.  “Go into the process with reasonable expectations.   It takes time to make changes, add quality content and wait for the search engines to find and reward this content.  Each day, more than one million pieces of new content are posted to the Internet.  It takes time to rise above the fray.”

A law firm that has experienced worsening search engine results in the wake of Panda, Penguin and Hummingbird can take positive steps to restore performance.   Google will continue to reward webpages with strong content marketing efforts, including answer-driven content.  It also rewards sites that generate social media buzz – especially an active presence on its proprietary YouTube and Google+ platforms.

Article By:

Janet Ellen Raasch
Of:
Strategic Writing And Ghostwriting

LinkedIn for Lawyers: How to Double Your Connections in No Time [INFOGRAPHIC]

The Rainmaker Institute mini logo (1)

If you practice business law of any type, then you should know by now that you need to be on LinkedIn.

But just like being on a treadmill without turning on the power won’t budge your waistline, “being on” LinkedIn is not enough to get you any benefit from this fantastic social media platform for business.  You have to be active!

The infographic below from WhoIsHostingThis.com shows you how you can double your LinkedIn connections in just five minutes a day.  Specifically, you need to:

  • Send an invitation to at least one new connection a day
  • Participate in relevant LinkedIn discussion groups at least once a week
  • Ask people you know to endorse you
  • Share your blog content, an article, a video or a presentation
  • Add a link to your LinkedIn profile to your email signature and post on your social media profiles
  • Keep your profile updated

LinkedIn Connections

Article By:

Stephen Fairley
Of:
The Rainmaker Institute

Supreme Court Inks Uniform Standing Test for Lanham Act False Advertising Claims

Katten Muchin

Key Takeaways

  1. The US Supreme Court created a uniform test for standing for false advertising claims under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, resolving a three-way circuit split.
  2. The new standing test requires the plaintiff to allege and prove that it suffered an injury to a commercial interest in sales or business reputation, and that such injury was proximately caused by the defendant’s alleged misrepresentations.
  3. The Court closed the courthouse doors to consumer class action suits under Section 43(a), pointing to the commercial interest requirement.
  4. The decision may prompt speculation regarding uncertainty as to standing for other claims under Section 43(a), including claims for infringement of unregistered trademarks.

Discussion of the Case

In a decision issued March 25, 2014, Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc., the US Supreme Court rejected three conflicting tests for standing for false advertising claims under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act, creating a new test in the process. Specifically, plaintiffs must now “plead (and ultimately prove) an injury to a commercial interest in sales or business reputation proximately caused by the defendant’s misrepresentations.”

Plaintiff Lexmark International, Inc. (Lexmark) sells laser printers and corresponding ink cartridges. The ink cartridges contain a microchip that deactivates them after they run out of ink, which is intended to stop “remanufacturers” from refurbishing and selling the ink cartridges in competition with Lexmark. Defendant Static Control Components, Inc. (Static Control), while not a direct competitor of Lexmark, sells component parts to remanufacturers, including a replacement microchip that allows the remanufacturers to once again refurbish and sell ink cartridges in competition with Lexmark. In response, Lexmark sent letters to the remanufacturers, advising that it was illegal to sell the refurbished ink cartridges and, in particular, that it was illegal to use Static Control’s products to refurbish the ink cartridges.

Lexmark sued Static Control for copyright infringement based on its creation and sale of the microchips. Static Control counterclaimed for false advertising based on, among other things, the letters to the remanufacturers. The US District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky dismissed Static Control’s counterclaim for lack of “prudential standing,” and the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit reversed.

The Supreme Court granted certiorari and ultimately held that Static Control satisfied the Court’s new test for standing under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act. In so holding, the Court swept aside what it called the “misleading” concept of “prudential standing,” which has been applied by courts as an additional hurdle to alleging standing beyond the broad “case or controversy” requirement (i.e., an injury in fact that is fairly traceable to the conduct complained of) of Article III of the US Constitution. The Court held that standing simply flows from traditional statutory interpretation principles. In particular, courts need only look to the at-issue statute to determine (1) whether the plaintiff’s alleged injury falls within the “zone of interest” protected by the statute, and if so, (2) whether such injury was proximately caused by the defendant’s alleged misrepresentations.

The Court’s new standing analysis falls somewhere in the middle of the three rejected tests: one, which conferred standing only on direct competitors of the defendant; the second, which used a multifactor analysis borrowed from antitrust law; and the third, which conferred standing on any plaintiff that demonstrated a “reasonable interest to be protected against” and a “reasonable basis for believing” that such interest was likely to be harmed.

Turning to the interpretation of the “zone of interest” protected by the Lanham Act, the Court looked to the statute’s clear statement of intent in Section 45 regarding protection against “unfair competition.” Citing to a law review article from 1929, the Court found that unfair competition “was generally understood to be concerned with injuries to business reputation and present and future sales.” Thus, the Court concluded that the “zone of interest” of Section 43(a) was limited to injuries to a commercial interest in reputation or sales. The Court then slammed the courthouse doors on consumer class actions under Section 43(a), pointing out that this “zone of interest” excluded a suit based on a “consumer who is hoodwinked into purchasing a disappointing product.”

On the facts at hand, the Court held that Static Control had sufficiently alleged lost sales and damage to its business reputation, easily satisfying the “zone of interest” requirement. Further, the Court found that Static Control’s allegations sufficiently pled that those injuries were proximately caused by Lexmark’s representations that Static Control’s business was illegal. Accordingly, the Court held that Static Control had standing and was thus “entitled to a chance to prove its case.”

While this decision provides some welcome certainty for false advertising litigants, ending the three-way circuit split regarding Section 43(a) false advertising standing, it also opens the door to speculation regarding standing for other “unfair competition” claims under Section 43(a) (e.g., infringement of unregistered trademarks). Specifically, the Court’s holding and analysis were not expressly limited to Section 43(a)(1)(b), which relates to false advertising, but instead apply to all of Section 43(a). It is thus unclear whether, for example, some increased level of “proximate harm” will be required for trademark claims under Section 43(a). Then again, the Court’s formulation of what constitutes proximate harm under Section 43(a)—when “deception of consumers causes them to withhold trade from the plaintiff”—seems to fit nicely with the “likelihood of consumer confusion” standard applied in trademark cases.

Article By:

Roger P. Furey
Doron S. Goldstein
Michael R. Justus
Of:
Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP

How to Write Blog Posts People Actually Want to Read [INFOGRAPHIC]

The Rainmaker Institute mini logo (1)

 

The purpose of having a blog is to foster an online dialogue with prospects, clients and referral sources so that when they need someone who does what you do, they will think of your first. Drawing people into your conversation requires you to often step outside your comfort zone, since most attorneys write the way they were trained to do in law school.

But when it comes to writing blog posts that people actually want to read, that just doesn’t cut it.

The most important thing to remember when writing for those who don’t practice law for a living is to be authentic. And the best way to do this is to write the way you talk. As you sit down to craft a new post, imagine you are talking to a friend who needs your guidance on a legal issue. Use the same words you use in your everyday life. Forget the grammar rules and write your draft, then go back over it to correct any glaring grammatical errors.

The infographic below, courtesy of Copyblogger.com, outlines the other essentials for writing blog posts. Print it off and keep a copy by your computer to refer to as you write. Following these simple guidelines will have you authoring a compelling, lead-generating blog in no time.

Blogs Social Media

Article by: 

Stephen Fairley

Of:

The Rainmaker Institute

How a Smartphone App Aims to Replace Attorneys

The Rainmaker Institute mini logo (1)

 

A smartphone app that allows users to create, sign and send legally binding documents is the latest tech tool developed to shake up the delivery of legal services.  And its name, aptly enough, is Shake.

Shake is the brainchild of Abe Geiger, an entrepreneur who found that standard contracts were too cumbersome and complicated to meet the needs of today’s business world, even though he has access to all the free legal advice he needs (his wife is an attorney).

As with so many other inventions, Shake started with the thought that, “There has to be a better way.”

Smartphone App Legal Services

With some Silicon Valley VC funding, Geiger and his team set out on their mission, which is posted on their website:

Our mission is to make the law accessible, understandable and affordable for consumers and small businesses. We want to empower our users to share ideas, goods, and services without the fear of being stiffed for a freelance gig or putting their business at risk.

Geiger said he believes that change in the legal industry will be driven by small businesses and consumers, not by lawyers and law firms.  He says that the legal market is huge, inefficient, underserved by technology and begging for change.

Sounds like he has more than one reason to shake things up.

Carolyn Elefant, who blogs about solos and small firms at MyShingle.com, wrote recently in an Above the Law post that the app won’t displace real lawyers because the people who want to use an app or a website for their legal documents are not likely to hire an attorney anyway.  I tend to agree.

I also agree with Geiger’s assertion that people are looking for more technology-based solutions for their legal problems, even if that “problem” is only a freelance contract or a NDA.

What attorneys should take away from this is that the market is moving toward technology much faster than most lawyers are, and making technology solutions available to clients – something as simple as downloadable documents off a secure website – is the new way your clients are defining good customer service.

Article by:

Stephen Fairley

Of:

The Rainmaker Institute

3 Ways for Law Firms to Advance Their Brands In a Post-Recession Environment

 

The post-recession state of professional services branding is like living in a bland, empty room. Wherever we look, we see reduced brand activity and sameness. Once creative and compelling, professional service brands (via websites, advertising and other channels) now seem less visible. Sadly, it appears to us that both the quality and quantity of firm branding efforts are regressing.

Are past failed efforts to blame? Is the stumbling economy a disincentive to act? Or is it the pendulum swing to business development, the tremendous pressure on CMOs to drive revenue? Has anyone else noticed the fall off in brand awareness and memorability? Do we still believe brand is critical to creating preference?

Good questions, we thought. So we polled CMOs and CEOs at law, accounting and consulting firms around the world for their opinions. Respondents included leaders of local, regional, national and international firms with an average size of 382 professionals (full survey results at http://www.greenfieldbelser.com/research-page/brand-regression#).

Questions, answers and insights

Here, we’ve summarized four of the most important findings, including the questions asked, the answers received and the top line takeaways.

1. Brand Health. We asked how important is brand to the success of your firm, how helpful is your brand in achieving that success, and is your brand understood by key audiences?

  • 95% of CMOs and 92% of CEOs/managing partners believe their brand is moderately or extremely important to success
  • But only 26% find their brand “very helpful”
  • On understanding, only 21% replied that their brands were well or perfectly understood by prospects.

The takeaway? Yikes! How can something perceived to be so important yield such poor scores in helpfulness and understanding? In live presentations of these findings, some of our CMO friends suggest that the answer lies in the degree of difficulty of executing branding efforts properly in any professional services firm.

One respondent shared this comment, “These days if you wish to undertake any sort of brand exercise, it must be titled ‘Strategic Positioning Initiative’ to avoid the factious response that sometimes arrives as talk turns to brand.”

Whatever you call it, our view is that pioneering brand efforts among professional service firms have given way to safer, less expensive efforts that suffer from unoriginality and are easy to ignore. Conventional wisdom suggests that in times of recession it’s better to tighten the belt and cut marketing and branding expenditures to focus on sales. However, when firms stop investing in the brand and marketing, they have fewer opportunities to sell. Healthy firms require strong commitment to both brand/marketing and business development—they go hand in hand.

2. Brand Distinction. Is your brand promise—the value proposition—unique? Is your brand expression (look, feel and voice) unique? Do you consider your brand to be innovative?

  • Only 20%say their brands are “very” or “extremely innovative.”
  • 66% respond that their promise of value is “marginally” or “moderately unique.”
  • 54% say their brand identity or expression is “marginally” or “moderately unique.”

The takeaway? Unicorns and innovative brands are as rare as hens’ teeth. Again, responding CMOs and CEOs believe brands are important to success but say uniqueness is hard to come by in the professional services space. Perhaps this relates to the fact that lawyers and law firms typically follow precedent (and one another). Meanwhile, marketers toil in the business of  awareness building and differentiation.

That’s the rub. The most innovative firms and best marketers have the courage to take risks, break with convention, and inspire interest in the brand among their audience.

3. Brand Quality. How do you rate the quality of your firm’s brand communication tools (things like websites, advertising, content marketing, etc.)?

On a scale of 1 (poor) to 5 (excellent) CEOs and CMOs graded their own efforts:

  • they gave websites a mean rating of 3.6 on the five point scale
  • core identity (logo and such) scored 3.5
  •  proposal and pitch materials were 3.5
  • videos, 3.1
  • thought leadership and content marketing, 2.8
  • advertising, 2.8
  • social media, 2.5

The takeaway? On average, brand communications quality is, well, average. Given the Type-A personalities in leading professional services firms—those accustomed to performing at the head of their class and fields—the low scores might be hard to figure. But the effect of the economy sheds light on the tough grading. During the great recession, we saw marketing attention focused heavily on business development. And why wouldn’t we? During that time, sales were hard to come by as firms hunkered down among bleak predictions. We saw marketing communication investment devalued and more do-it-yourself branding within firms. Yes, that led to savings, but at what cost to quality, awareness, memorability and preference for firms?

Previous research shows that professional services firm clients and prospects have preconceived and immediate feelings about the quality of a firm solely based on the quality of brand communications. This, in turn, can have a noticeable impact on opportunities and on revenue.

4. Brand channels and investments. Which communication channels are most important and where do the greatest investments go?

  • 85% believe firm websites are the most important channel; 92% say it is the greatest area of investment.
  • 67% rate proposals and pitch material as the second most important channel; but only 30% say it is an area of greatest investment.
  • 59% say substantive alerts, speaking and thought leadership are very important; 32% indicate investments here are highest.
  • 35% viewed firm and practice advertising as most important; 45% reported it as an area of greatest investment.

The takeaway? Tuning the channels for the clearest return is a challenge. Website investment matches its perceived importance (shocker) but other communications are either overfunded or underfunded relative to perceived importance. Major events are viewed as much less important but still command a disproportionate financial commitment (boondoggle, anyone?). Pitch materials are not getting the love CMOs and CEOs feel they deserve and blue sky thought leadership is short-changed, as well.

What to do about brand progression?

While our study and data does not prove that branding in the business-to-business services sector has regressed following the recession, it does confirm that there is significant room for improvement for professional services firms.

Firms can advance their branding by considering these three tips:

1. Increase investments in marketing and business development simultaneously:We should start by mentioning that, increasing investments does not always demand higher dollar figure. It could (and often should) be a reallocation of funds from unimportant or ineffective programs to the ones that have the most impact. Think of it as finding couch money; the dollars and cents may be rattling around your firm, but you  need to collect them from underneath the cushions and spend them wisely. This often requires doing less and doing it better.

2. Have the courage to do memorable, engaging and high quality brand communications. The great ad man, David Ogilvy, said, “You can’t bore people into buying your product or service.” Firms need to take greater creative risks in order to achieve differentiation. For those of you who see branding as lipstick or worse, take the words of another “counsel.” Andy Warhol commented, “I may be superficial, but I’m deeply superficial.”

3. Demand that the investments made in marketing and business development yield measurable results:   When better branding initiatives are carried out, leads increase and create an improved conversion ratio.   Our study looked at brand tracking and found that the bottom line is that few in the professional services have the patience or budgets to do tracking research well(link to the study is below).

For brand skeptics, keep this in mind—following the U.S. Stock Market crash of 1987, Nike tripled its marketing spend and emerged from the recession with profits nine times higher than before the recession started. Yes, we know Nike is not a legal, accounting or consulting firm, but they are great at executing groundbreaking marketing plans—.And you have to admit a 9x increase in profits is a compelling argument to “just do it.”

Article by:

Of:

Greenfield/Belser Ltd.

California Continues to Shape Privacy Standards: Song-Beverly Act Extended to Email Addresses

Womble Carlyle

 

Executive Summary: California retailer restricted from requiring a customer email address as part of a credit card transaction. We knew that asking for zip codes is intrusive personal questioning, and now asking for email has been added to the list.

California’s Song-Beverly Credit Card Act (Cal. Civ. Code Sec. 1747 et seq.) (“Song-Beverly Act” or “Act”) restricts businesses from requesting, or requiring, as a condition to accepting credit card payments that the card holder provide “personal identification information” that is written or recorded on the credit card transaction form or otherwise. “Personal identification information” means “information concerning the cardholder,other than information set forth on the credit card, and including, but not limited to, the card holder’s address and telephone number.” The California Supreme Court has previously ruled that zip codes are also “personal identification information” under the Song-Beverly Act. See Pineda (Jessica) v. Williams-Sonoma Stores, Inc., 2011 Cal. LEXIS 1502 (Cal. Feb. 10, 2011).

Recently, a United States federal district court in California expanded “personal identification information” to include email addresses in a decision denying retailer Nordstrom’s motion to dismiss claims it violated the Song-Beverly Act. The plaintiff sued Nordstrom for collecting his email address as part of a credit card transaction at one of its California stores in order to email him a receipt, then subsequently using his email address to send him frequent, unsolicited marketing emails. See Capp v. Nordstrom, Inc., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 151867, 2013 WL 5739102 (E.D. Cal. Oct. 21, 2013).

Raising a case of first impression under California law, Nordstrom claimed that email addresses are not “personal identification information” under the Song-Beverly Act, so the Act did not apply. The court disagreed with Nordstrom and found the opposite based on the California Supreme Court’s earlier ruling in Pineda. Nordstrom’s argument that email addresses can readily be changed, unlike zip codes, and consumers can have multiple email addresses was not persuasive. The court held that an email address regards a card holder in a more personal and specific way than a zip code. Unlike a zip code that refers to the general area where a card holder works or lives, email permits direct contact with the consumer and implicates their privacy interests. The court concluded that the collection of email addresses is contrary to the Song-Beverly Act’s purpose to guard against misuse of personal information for marketing purposes. In particular, the plaintiff’s allegation that his email address was collected to send him a receipt and then used to send him promotional emails directly implicates the protective purposes of the Act as interpreted in Pineda.

Pineda held that zip codes are personal information for purposes of the Song-Beverly Act, and therefore a brick and mortar retailer violated the Act when it requested and recorded such data. In the Pineda decision, the California Supreme Court found that zip codes, like the card holder’s address expressly called out as “personal identification information” under the Act, were unnecessary to completing the credit card transaction and inconsistent with the protective purpose of the Act. This is especially true when a zip code is collected to be used with the card holder’s name in order to locate the card holder’s address, permitting a retailer to locate indirectly what it is prohibited from obtaining directly under the Act.

Nordstrom also argued that the plaintiff’s claims under the Song-Beverly Act were preempted by the federal “Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing Act” (better known as the CAN-SPAM Act), but the court disagreed. While the CAN-SPAM Act contains a preemption provision, it only preempts state laws that regulate the manner in which email messages are sent and their content, both of which are not regulated under the Song-Beverly Act.

Retailer tip: The federal court issuing this most recent decision recommends waiting to request an email address (or a zip code) until after the consumer has the receipt from their credit card transaction in hand, and then sending the consumer emails only in conformance with the CAN-SPAM Act.

In the wake of Pineda, retailers faced class action lawsuits for requesting consumer zip codes at check out. This new decision could have a similar effect.

Article by:

Of:

Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice, PLLC

How Lawyers Can Leverage LinkedIn to Build Their Practice, Part 1 of 2

The Rainmaker Institute mini logo (1)

I think we can all agree that building long-term, meaningful and influential relationships is foundational to a successful legal practice. People don’t hire law firms; they hire an attorney. The more people you connect with, the more opportunities you have to build meaningful relationships, and the more potential clients you can generate.

With over 225 million members in over 200 countries, LinkedIn has quickly become THE ‘go to’ business-to-business directory and the most popular social networking platform dedicated to professional business development.

Here are some of the top tips from attorneys who have used LinkedIn to their advantage and know they have gained new clients from its smart use:

1. Complete Your Profile! You must commit to do this. You can’t ever hope to get the benefits without this. Put in as much information about yourself as you can. Use the same keywords and phrases prospects would use to search for an attorney in your practice area on Google.

Sometimes just where you went to college or law school can drive business or referrals to your firm. I know plenty of attorneys who have generated referrals because they went to the same school as someone else on LinkedIn, or grew up in the same hometown. Creating a shared reality with a prospect can be a powerful step toward acquiring their business. Also, certain applications with LinkedIn require that your profile be at least 50 – 75% complete in order to benefit from them.

2. Upload A Photo. Don’t be shy here. Don’t think about whether it’s right or wrong, just do it. A profile with no picture is a bad thing. LinkedIn is a social network for business professionals so your photo should convey that. Stay away from the photo of you on the golf course or holding a glass of wine. If you don’t have a professional headshot, they are available from any photography business for a nominal fee.

3. Use The Headline Below Your Profile To Make People Want to Know More.

linkedin profile

When you set up your profile, LinkedIn uses your name, title or position as your headline, but you can edit this to make it more powerful. Try to think of your headline as your professional tagline. You have the opportunity to describe the type of attorney you are and the type of work you are currently doing. Do not make the mistake of listing more than two areas of law here, as you want to appear as a specialist. Specialists generate more referrals than generalists. Remember the phrase, “jack of all trades, master of none!”

4. Use The “Sharebox” Often. If you want to see the social power of LinkedIn, this is where you will find it. This area of LinkedIn allows you to add a brief update of what you are doing, any new professional certifications you have received, interesting cases or any other information you feel comfortable sharing. This is not a ‘chat’ site; it is for information that is professionally relevant.

In tomorrow’s post, I will share 5 more tips for leveraging LinkedIn to build your client and referral base.

Article by:

Stephen Fairley

Of:

The Rainmaker Institute

Lawsuits Against Creditors of NewPage

Michael Best Logo

The trustee for the litigation trust resulting from the NewPage Corporation bankruptcy has launched nearly 800 lawsuits against pre-bankruptcy creditors of NewPage Corporation seeking payment to the trust.

The lawsuits (also called adversary proceedings) have been filed in Delaware bankruptcy court by litigation trustee Pirinate Consulting Group LLC to recover allegedly preferential payments made in the months prior to the company’s Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing in September, 2011.

Much to the surprise of many who did business with the debtor prior to the bankruptcy filing, not only are they waiting for payment on amounts owed, but they will now face claims that they must give back monies previously received.

Defendants should know there are often defenses to these claims, including that the allegedly preferential payments were made in the ordinary course of business or that additional goods were shipped after those allegedly preferential payments were received. Upon receipt of a complaint, defendants should contact counsel knowledgeable about bankruptcy avoidance actions for assistance. Failure to respond to the adversary proceeding complaint in a timely manner, can result in a judgment and collection efforts by the litigation trustee.

Article By:

 of

Search Engine Optimization (SEO): The Connection Between Being Found Online and Being Worth Finding

avvo

According to a Legal Marketing Survey Report conducted by Avvo and Lexblog, the #1 legal marketing subject solo and small firm lawyers are interested in learning more about is search engine optimization (or “SEO”, in internet parlance).  Not how to build an online referral network, stay in better touch with existing clients using online tools or manage their online reputations, but SEO: a series of tools and tactics that attempt to ensure that a firm’s website is near the top of the search results when a potential client searches online for terms relevant to that firm’s practice.

This level of interest is not without reason.  The practice of law is competitive, and lawyers are competitive.  So there is little surprise that, say, a “Boston DUI Lawyer” would want to do whatever necessary to be at the top of the page whenever some poor unfortunate who has had a late-night run in with the BPD turns to Google or Bing looking for legal help.  But SEO is only one piece of the puzzle when it comes to client development online, and it helps to know what SEO can – and most likely cannot – do.

SEO’s Little Secret, and an Aside on SEM

Any busy practitioner has no doubt run across SEO consultants.  For a fee, these folks offer to help make lawyers and law firms more competitive when it comes to the web; i.e., likelier to rise higher in the search results.  It’s important to not confuse SEO experts with “SEM” consultants (although many times the same consultants sell both services).  Pitches along the lines of “get on the top of Google search results – guaranteed!” are based on SEM.  The technique has its place, but must be recognized for what it is:  Search Engine Marketing.  SEM consultants make their guarantee because they will buy ads on Google on a firm’s behalf.  That firm then appears – as an advertisement, not an organic result – on the top of whatever search results ads were bought for.  While it’s a surefire way to get noticed, it can also be very expensive, and requires at least as much thought and analysis as any other marketing campaign.

Unlike SEM, SEO involves making “fixes” to a site – and sometimes off-site strategies – rather than purchasing advertisements.  It’s important to think of SEO consulting as having two aspects:  A technical aspect, and a magical aspect.  There are many straightforward technical things that websites must have in place in order to put their best foot forward with the search engines.  Platforms – be they directories like Avvo and LinkedIn, social networks like Facebook or Twitter, or blogging services like WordPress and Typepad – have already taken care of this work, and those using these services benefit from the fact that their profiles or blogs will already be optimized for the search engines.  However, many lawyer and law firm websites fail on this count, and would absolutely benefit from this technical form of SEO help.

The “magical” side of SEO, however, involves the use of other techniques (examples include keyword stuffing and comment spam) in an attempt to take an otherwise search engine-friendly website and make it even more eye-catching to the Googles and Bings of the world.  Over the years, these tactics have yielded enough short-term successes and alignments of marketing spend with dumb luck to keep this side of the business alive.  But consider: Google tweaks its search algorithm over 500 times a year.  And it is a model of opacity when it comes to providing a peek under the hood at how its algorithm works.  Attempting to outwit Google takes a mix of wild guessing, cargo-cultism and blind faith.

And websites do sometimes get lucky, for a while, by frolicking in the magical end of the SEO pool. But they do not fool or outsmart the search engines for long.  Google and Bing are constantly optimizing for – and throwing billions of dollars and thousands of uber-bright minds against – a goal of returning the most relevant search results.  Period.  Assuming a lawyer’s site has already got its technical SEO house in order, the best technique to do better in the rankings is to give the engines what they want:  better, more relevant content.  And the good news is that this is exactly what potential clients want as well.

Standing Out Once You’re Found

This should be a perfect alignment: Potential clients are looking for in-depth information about lawyers and legal problems, and the search engines strive to surface such content.  So why are so many lawyer websites replete with stiffly-worded bios and empty platitudes about the law and legal practice?  Why is there so little substance and personality to be found?

The legal marketplace is competitive, and competence is only the price of admission.  Lawyers and firms that not only want to be found online, but to be selected online, must do more than cite their impressive credentials and wait for the phone to ring.  Here are some high-level starters:

  • Claim online real estate.  Lawyers must let clients find out about them, in depth, wherever they might be looking – directories, social media, etc.  And all of those places can link back to a law firm website.
  •  Lead with passion.  No firm should be satisfied with a by-the-book, resume-format website.  Lawyers who succeed talk about why they love the law, how they make a difference for their clients, what makes them different from all of the other lawyers out there.
  • Write and connect.  Enough with the dry case summaries or (god forbid) lists of local accidents designed for “keyword optimization” purposes. The best material online is crisp, relevant pieces that potential clients or referral sources will want to read or share.

There’s no disputing the superficial appeal of “magical” SEO solutions. But, ultimately, what the search engines are optimized to find – AND what potential clients want to read – is deeply relevant, authentic and differentiated content.  Firms that relentlessly focus on providing that kind of value will be the winners online.

Article By:

 of