How to Get Amazing Attention for Your Firm on Social Media

The Rainmaker Institute

Human beings are wired for loving the spotlight.  When you post something on social media and no one comments or likes, it feels almost like a personal rejection.  And when you’re posting to get attention for your business and no one cares what you’re writing, you are wasting your time.

social mediaOne of the most important ways to get noticed on social media — especially on Twitter — is to make sure your post has a great headline.  There are actually very good psychological reasons for using certain words that makes it almost irresistible for people to click.  Here are 8 proven formulas to craft your headlines around:

  1. Surprise — using words that surprise or startle captures attention because we love novelty.  Words that break the pattern stand out.
  2. Questions — using questions works because a question mark stimulates the human brain to seek an answer.
  3. Curiosity — using incomplete information in your headline to pique curiosity.  A famous example of this is the 1926 ad with the headline, “They laughed when I sat down at the piano…but when I started to play…!”
  4. Negatives — using negative superlatives like “worst” or “stop” intrigues us because we want to know if there is something we shouldn’t be doing.
  5. How to — we all want to get better, so using “how to” in your headline makes a promise of improving the reader’s knowledge.
  6. Numbers — because humans dislike uncertainty, we respond well to numbers in headlines.
  7. Reader referencing — using phrases like, “For those who don’t know what to do after a car accident” or just the word “you” are powerful drivers.
  8. Specifics — quantifiable facts and figures that elicit an image in our head are incredibly intriguing.

Here are more than 180 power words to use in your headlines, courtesy of CoSchedule.com:

power words

ARTICLE BY:

OF:

Fix These 4 Problems on Your Blog to Maximize Search Engine Optimization

Consultsweb Logo

1.   Make It Useful

Write about something that will provide value to the person reading it. Write with your audience in mind. Keep the writing simple but professional. Remember: Your clients do not have a law degree and if your writing confuses them, they will look for answers elsewhere.

Legal MarketingThink about your client base. Are they middle aged woman, seniors, mostly male, individuals with physical handicaps? Target your posts to their interests, needs and questions. Avoid general articles that could be for anyone. Have the reader in mind when you are writing content and show your expertise. Answer the reader’s unasked questions.

Targeting a specific demographic will help with the social signals as it will probably be shared more and will earn links. Fluff content may get you some rankings for staying relevant and regularly updating your website, but if an actual human goes on your site and does not find value in what you have posted, chances of a return visit are slim—and your ultimate goal should be people returning to your site based on the quality of its content.

2.   Make It Local

Think about your local area and any news or hot topics that you can cover in blog updates. Can you add unique value to these stories? The more your topics and writing speak to your local audience, the more engaged they will be with your site. Write about charities or events you are involved in.

3.   Engage the Audience

How does the page look? Content is not just words. Content can be text, images, videos, charts, graphics and data. Use video and image assets to help tell your story. Visual content engages the user and instills respect for the quality of the information presented on the page.

Also, long blog posts allow you to fit a lot of good information and keywords onto the page, but you will need to divide it in to short sections or into an FAQ format to enable visitors to scan the page for the information they seek.

Use your employees for feedback. Ask them to share your content. If three months have passed and no one has shared anything, it is time to start asking why.

4.   Get the Technical Details Right

Effective title structure is key to generating good organic traffic and a high-quality user experience. Utilizing headings (H1, H2, H3), alt text and description tagging is important for user experience (UX) and for search engines to understand and optimally display your content.

Article By:

Of:

How to Increase Your Engagement on Facebook [INFOGRAPHIC]

The Rainmaker Institute

If you’re using Facebook to “sell” your practice, you are probably disappointed in your results.  You see, Facebook is about engagement and anything that smacks of a hard-sell is usually tuned out.

facebook like

You will get much better results if you simply surrender to what Facebook can deliver, which is an opportunity to meet new prospects and to share your knowledge that may someday lead to new business.

A lot of new business connections occur on Facebook based on people you used to know –old high school or college friends that you connect with there and then educate them naturally on what you do now.  In that sense, approaching Facebook as a referral source cultivation opportunity could be a mindset that will pay you big dividends in the future.

That said, there are certain things you can do that research shows leads to more engagement with your Facebook posts.  This infographic lays that out:

Facebook engagement marketing

Article By:

Of:

10 Insights You Want to Gain from Your Social Media Monitoring

The Rainmaker Institute mini logo (1)

If you are participating in social media for your law firm, you should also be monitoring whether or not your time investment is paying dividends.

Social Media Insight

You should be creating Google Alerts or searching on Social Mention for the name of your law firm and the names of your attorneys at least once a month.  Create alerts for the areas of law you practice as well.  The social media blog site Buffer recommends you keep these 10 insights in mind when reviewing your results:

Sentiment — Are mentions generally position, neutral or negative?

Questions — Look for questions people may have that you can provide the answers to in your social media posts or blogs.

Feedback — If you see feedback on Avvo or Yelp or some other site that directly affects your firm, you need to listen and respond appropriately.

Links — keep track of who is retweeting or reposting your content and keep track of who is linking back to you.

Pain points — absorb what people are talking about online that is of concern to them and use that information to inform your future posts.

Content — this is where your alerts for your practice area come in handy.  Use these to mine for topics of interest to your target market.

Trends — recent court decisions or trending news in your practice area should be included in your posts so it is clear you are on top of all the trends.

Media — journalists spend a lot of time online so pay attention to the areas they are covering that might provide you with an opportunity to reach out as a spokesperson on those subjects.

Influencers — are there certain individuals who keep popping up in your feeds?  They may be someone it would be advantageous for you to know as an industry influencer.

Advocates — monitoring is a great way to find and recognize those people who are talking positively about you online.

Article By:

Of:

Making These 3 Errors in WordPress Makes Your Law Firm’s Blog Less Effective

Correct Consults Logo

Here are three common WordPress mistakes that will make your legal website less effective than it should be:

  1. Posting content that is not unique, engaging or well designed. Unstructured information, filler materials and overly general articles do not motivate a user to interact with the site. Your goal should be to create content that users want to share or bookmark or research further by following your in-text links.
  2. Getting caught up in finding the perfect WP template and design. Many inexperienced website authors expend all their energy before even considering content development. A lot of sites use generic content that reads like it was added as an afterthought. It is hard to schedule time to generate good content but when most people say, “Oh, I’ll come back to improve that later,” they never do.
  3. Failing to design each page for its intended purpose. Out-of-the-box WordPress themes use similar forms and sidebars on every page. It is important for the design (as well as the content) to serve the page’s purpose.
Article By:

Of:

Making Use of Social Media: FDA Releases Two Draft Guidelines on the Use of Social Media Platforms by Drug and Device Manufacturers

MintzLogo2010_Black

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has released two long-awaited draft guidance documents for the drug and device industries revolving around the use of social media platforms by drug and device manufacturers — Internet/Social Media Platforms: Correcting Independent Third Party Misinformation About Prescription Drugs and Medical Devices (“Guidance on Correcting Third Party Misinterpretation”), and Internet/Social Media Platforms with Character Space Limitations – Presenting Risk and Benefit Information for Prescription Drugs and Medical Devices (“Guidance on Presenting Risk/Benefit Information”).

As the titles suggest, the purpose of the documents is to clarify how social media may be utilized by drug and medical device companies for the voluntary correction of misinformation provided by independent third parties, as well as for presenting promotional messaging regarding risk/benefit information of products. But while the guidelines provide helpful clarification regarding how such platforms may be utilized, they each also raise considerations that companies should take heed of before beginning to use these outlets, and should be factored into a company’s social media guidelines.

Internet/Social Media Platforms: Correcting Independent Third Party Misinformation About Prescription Drugs and Medical Devices

As an initial matter, the Guidance on Correcting Third Party Misinterpretation (“Draft Guidance #1”) establishes two points: first, Draft Guidance #1 only applies to misinformation posted to Internet-based platforms by an independent third party, therefore excluding content provided by the company itself, its employees and agents. Second, Draft Guidance #1 establishes that the exception to a company’s obligation to respond to or correct misinformation only applies to information that is “truly independent,” for example posted by an independent third party to an unaffiliated platform or a platform providing content that is not controlled by the company.

However, Draft Guidance #1 does not completely exclude company-operated sites. In stark contrast with the company’s obligation to correct content when that content is “owned, controlled, created …influenced or affirmatively adopted or endorsed by, or on behalf of, the firm,” where such corrections are obligatory and also carry advertising and labeling regulatory requirements, Draft Guidance #1 does not hold companies responsible for correcting misinformation where a company owns or operates an online platform that allows for user-generated content (chat room, etc.) over which a company does notexert control. However, Draft Guidance #1 cautions that such a site should contain an “overarching and conspicuous statement that the firm did not create or control the [user-generated content].”

If a company chooses to voluntarily respond to truly independent misinformation, Draft Guidance #1 sets parameters on the process for taking correction action, which should either be by (i) providing appropriate truthful corrective information or (ii) providing “a reputable source for correct information, such as the firm’s contact information. In either approach, in order to constitute “appropriate corrective information” a firm’s communication should denote the affiliation of the corrective post with the company, and be:

  • relevant and responsive to the misinformation;
  • limited and tailored to the misinformation;
  • non-promotional in nature, tone, and presentation;
  • accurate;
  • consistent with the FDA-required labeling for the product;
  • supported by sufficient evidence; and
  • posted either in conjunction with or reference the misinformation.

In acknowledgement of the vast nature of the Internet and certain forums and the reality that it may be impractical for a company to attempt to correct all misinformation about its products that may appear, Draft Guidance #1 stipulates that companies do not need to address all incorrect information that may be posted regarding a particular drug or device, even if a company elects to correct a selective portion. When addressing any misinformation, therefore, Draft Guidance #1 recommends that a company create a figurative box around the particular misinformation and portion of the forum it intends to correct, and then revise all the incorrect information within that defined boundary, which should include also correcting positive misinformation or exaggerations. Following corrective action, while Draft Guidance #1 does not hold companies responsible for monitoring the communication, it does recommend that companies keep records that include (i) the date, location, and content of the misinformation; (ii) when the wrongful information was discovered; and (iii) a description of the corrective information provided, including the date it was furnished.

Finally, Draft Guidance #1 suggests that the FDA does not intend to object if a firm voluntarily corrects misinformation and the voluntarily provided corrective information does not satisfy otherwise applicable regulatory labeling or advertising requirements, so long as the corrective information is not non-truthful, misleading, or in a manner other than recommended by Draft Guidance #1. However, companies should take heed that any corrective action that goes beyond merely providing accurate information that is specifically tailored to the misinformation it is addressing (i.e., including slogans or promotional information) must comply with applicable regulatory requirements related to labeling or advertising.

While helpful for establishing clearly both the parameters for correctly responding to misinformation as well as for clearly limiting a company’s obligation to respond to any or all misinformation posted by an independent third party, the Guidance on Correcting Third Party Misinterpretation also reminds companies to take caution when doing so to ensure that their responses are narrowly tailored enough to fall under the purview of the guidance and outside regulatory requirements. That caution includes carefully considering where misinformation clearly constitutes “truly independent” information. Companies should be mindful of the reality that “truly independent” is not a concept that is well defined, and should thus be cautious before asserting that certain misinformation may fall under the purview of Draft Guidance #1 as the FDA advances a broad interpretation of when a company is responsible for taking corrective action.

Internet/Social Media Platforms with Character Space Limitations — Presenting Risk and Benefit Information for Prescription Drugs and Medical Devices

Prepared by the Office of Prescription Drug Promotion, the second guidance issued by the FDA last week, the Guidance on Presenting Risk/Benefit Information (“Draft Guidance #2”), addresses the parameters around presenting benefits and risks information on Internet and social media platforms with character spacing limitations, such as microblogs (e.g., Twitter) and online paid search (e.g., “sponsored links” on search engines such as Google). Draft Guidance #2 clearly establishes that, as a threshold matter, the character restrictions do not eliminate the company’s responsibility to ensure its promotional messaging complies with all applicable regulations related to advertising and labeling, and cautions that such forms of media may not be appropriate for promotion of certain products, such as those with complex indications or risk profiles.

For companies that choose to make product benefit claims on character-space-limited communication sites, while each may reasonably use common abbreviations (including scientific and medical abbreviations), punctuation marks, and other symbols to comply with space constraints, Draft Guidance #2 presents a broad set of rules that must be satisfied by each communication relating to both risk and benefit information.

Benefit Information

  • Benefit information should be accurate, non-misleading, and reveal material facts within each individual message or tweet.
  • Benefit information should be included with risk information in the same message. Do not spread benefit and risk information across multiple messages or tweets.

Risk Information

  • Risk information should be included with benefit information in the same message. Do not spread risk and benefit information across multiple messages or tweets.
  • Risk information should be “comparable in scope” to the benefit information, and should, at minimum, include the most serious risks, e.g., those included in a boxed warning or known to be life-threatening, among others, associated with the product. To determine whether risk information is “comparable in scope” to the benefit information, the FDA weighs (i) whether the risk information “qualifies any representations made about the product,” and (ii) whether the risk information is presented with a “prominence and readability comparable to the benefit claims about the product.” While risk disclosures may be concise when paired with benefit information, a hyperlink to a complete, and exclusive, discussion of risks should be included and appropriately titled and not promotional in nature.
  • Both the proprietary and established (generic) name for the product should be included within the character-space limited communication and on each landing page associated with each hyperlink in that initial communication. Draft Guidance #2 recommends that the landing page be devoted exclusively to the communication of risk information about the product and not to the promotional home page. Such landing page should also prominently display quantitative ingredient and dosing information for prescription drugs.

In light of the restrictions set forth by Draft Guidance #2, while companies should feel comfortable taking advantage of current social media platforms including those with character restrictions, they should also ensure that the parties responsible for drafting any such posts are aware of the parameters placed on such communications. A hypothetical example provided by Draft Guidance #2 exemplifies some of the potential disadvantages of such messaging:

NoFocus (rememberine HCl) for mild to moderate memory loss-May cause seizures in patients with a seizure disorder www.nofocus.com/risk

While the message complies with each of Draft Guidance #2’s directives, the balancing of risk and benefit information in a space restricted communication may have the unintended result of highlighting risk over benefit. Additionally, from a practical standpoint, the space constraints may prevent the inclusion of all necessary information. If a company cannot conclude that “adequate” benefit and risk information (along with other required disclosure) may be communicated in the same message or tweet — particularly at 140 characters — Draft Guidance #2 recommends that the company reconsider whether the use of the particular platform is the appropriate forum for the dissemination of such messaging before making use of such forums, once again in particular for drugs with complex indications or high risk profiles.

As a general conclusion, while the Guidance on Presenting Risk/Benefit Information is self-admittedly limited in scope, and does not address “promotion via product websites, webpages on social networking platforms (e.g., [Facebook, Twitter, YouTube]), and online web banners,” it undeniably provides helpful direction for drug and device companies’ use of social media sites for promotional messaging where communications are restricted to a limited number of characters, as well as highlighting how the FDA may intend to regulate such use. Companies should pay careful attention to the restrictions while taking advantage of the opportunities these social media platforms offer, and should take care to ensure to instill clear policies that comply with Draft Guidance #2 that are available to, and understood by, individuals tasked with producing and monitoring social media content for the company.

The FDA will be accepting comments on both Draft Guidance #1 and Draft Guidance #2 until September 16, 2014.

Article By:

Of:

Tips for Growing Your Fan Base on Facebook

The Rainmaker Institute mini logo (1)

One of the biggest challenges for anyone seeking to have a large social media following is growing your audience to a healthy level.  Sometimes it almost feels like we’re back in grade school, looking for other kids to like us!

Inbound marketing firm Hubspot has a number of informative presentations on Facebook marketing, but this quick slide guide with five tips on how to grow your audience is particularly useful since it visually walks you through the steps you need to take on your Facebook page to reap the rewards from each tip:

One of the biggest challenges for anyone seeking to have a large social media following is growing your audience to a healthy level.  Sometimes it almost feels like we’re back in grade school, looking for other kids to like us!

Inbound marketing firm Hubspot has a number of informative presentations on Facebook marketing, but this quick slide guide with five tips on how to grow your audience is particularly useful since it visually walks you through the steps you need to take on your Facebook page to reap the rewards from each tip:

5 Quick Tips For Growing Your Facebook Audience from HubSpot

Article By:

Of:

Social Media Ethical Guidelines: What Lawyers Need to Know

logo

Don’t let your online activities land you on the bar discipline docket.

The New York State Bar Association’s Commercial and Federal Litigation Section has published a set of Social Media Ethics Guidelines that provide useful guidance for all lawyers (not just New Yorkers) on the use of social media.  While the Guidelines set forth a broad outline for dealing with social media, lawyers will still need to think hard about their particular situations.  Below are some of the guidelines that lawyers and law firms should keep in mind.

Social Media, Tweet, Share, Chat, Like, Friend, News, Photo

On-Line Advice:  What should you do if a Facebook friend posts a legal question?  Answer it?  Have you created an attorney-client relationship?  Do you owe a duty to all of your friend’s Facebook friends who will see that advice and possibly rely on it?  The New York Guidelines suggest that you should keep any reply broad and general.  “A lawyer may provide general answers to legal questions asked on social media.  A lawyer, however, cannot provide specific legal advice on a social media network because a lawyer’s responsive communications may be found to have created an attorney-client relationship and legal advice also may impermissibly disclose information protected by the attorney-client privilege.”  (Guideline 2.A).  Great social media advice, but the Guidelines do not say when a “general answer” becomes “specific advice.”  A good rule of thumb would be – if the request is specific and includes specific information about your friend’s situation – do not answer the question on Facebook.

Advertising: The Guidelines also say that if you use your social media profile primarily for your law business – think LinkedIn – it is subject to the rules governing attorney advertising and solicitation.  (Guideline 1.A).  When using Twitter to market your practice, the Commentary to the Guidelines says that you may “utilize commonly recognized abbreviations for information that is required in attorney advertisements.”  The Guidelines thus suggest that you will need to devote some of your 140 characters to complying with advertising rules, but they don’t say exactly what content would make for a compliant Tweet.

New York’s Rule of Professional Conduct 7.1(f) requires all lawyer advertising to say “attorney advertising.”  Presumably, then, attorneys can say “Att’y Ad” or something similar in their Tweets.  The Massachusetts Rules of Professional Conduct do not require “Attorney advertising” but do require that any advertising “include the name of the lawyer, group of lawyers, or firm responsible for its content.”  Mass. R. Prof. C. 7.2(d).  Thus, Massachusetts lawyers may have a few extra characters in their advertising Tweets than New York lawyers, though they should Tweet under their own names – not a clever screen name.

That said, the Massachusetts rules could still raise compliance issues for lawyers who use social media – particularly concerning Rule 7.3 which governs solicitation of professional employment.  For example, the Office of Bar Counsel has previously advised that “bulletin boards, which display information in cyberspace and allow people to post and respond to messages, … do not involve real-time, live interaction between lawyers and prospective clients” and are thus in-bounds for lawyers to advertise and solicit clients.  On the other hand, “solicitation through … interactive computer-accessed chat rooms is prohibited as in-person solicitation” where the chat rooms “offer conversation that is live, interactive and conducted in real-time or near real-time.”  On this rationale, a lawyer who finds herself in a “real-time” Twitter or Facebook conversation could unwittingly breach Rule 7.3(d) (prohibiting “in person” solicitation).

Among the other useful tips from the New York Guidelines:

  • If someone posts a statement to your social media profile that does not comply with advertising guidelines, you may have an obligation to remove the post. (Guideline 1.C);
  • “A lawyer may view the public portion of a person’s social media profile or public posts even if such person is represented by another lawyer,” including in situations where the person’s account tracks the identities of the viewers. (Guideline 3.A);
  • A lawyer may request permission to view the restricted portion of an unrepresented person’s social media website or profile. However, the lawyer must use her full name and an accurate profile, and she may not create a different or false profile in order to mask her identity.”  (Guideline 3.B);
  • The situation is different if the person is represented.  “A lawyer shall not contact a represented person to seek to review the restricted portion of the person’s social media profile unless an express authorization has been furnished by such person.”  (Guideline 3.C);
  • You can advise a client to “take down” a post, although the client may have an obligation to preserve the information removed. (Guideline 4.A).

The Guidelines are not universal, however, and the drafters caution that there are numerous conflicting opinions and rules around the United States.  For example, a recent New Hampshire ethics opinion has a different take on Guideline 3.B, finding that a lawyer must disclose her involvement in a matter when sending a “friend” request to an unrepresented witness to view restricted portions of the witness’ profile.  “[S]ending a Facebook friend request in-name-only constitutes a misrepresentation by omission, given that the witness might not immediately associate the lawyer’s name with his or her purpose and that, were the witness to make that association, the witness would in all likelihood deny the request.”  N.H. Bar Ass’n Ethics Advisory Comm., Op. 2012-13/05.

As you incorporate social media into your practice, you must research the law, understand the capabilities of the social media platforms you use, and carefully consider your online activities in connection with the Rules of Professional Conduct.  In Massachusetts, if in doubt, you could contact the Office of Bar Counsel’s ethics hotline and ask.  The hotline is available between 2 and 4 p.m. Monday, Wednesday and Fridays at (617) 728-8750. Ultimately, your best defense against stepping into a social media ethics landmine is to stop and think before you click.

Article By:

Of:

Wisconsin’s Password Protection Law Mandates Review of Policies and Practices

Godfrey Kahn

Wisconsin has joined the ranks of other states who have limited the circumstances under which employees or applicants can be required to provide access to his or her personal Internet account. The Social Media Protection Act (2013 Wisconsin Act 208) became effective April 16, 2014. The new law makes it illegal for an employer to request or require an employee or applicant to disclose personal Internet account access information. A parallel prohibition within the Act applies to educational institutions and landlords.

A “personal Internet account” is defined as an Internet-based account that is created and used by an individual exclusively for purposes of personal communications. With the passage of the Act, employers are now prohibited from:

  • Requesting or requiring an employee or applicant, as a condition of employment, to disclose access information to the individual’s personal Internet account or to ask the individual to grant access to or allow observation of that account.
  • Discharging or otherwise discriminating against an employee for exercising his/her right to refuse to disclose personal Internet account access information.
  • Refusing to hire an applicant because the individual did not disclose personal Internet account access information.

While the law primarily protects the privacy of employees and applicants, it also offers employers a limited degree of protection. Specifically, employers can:

  • Request or require an employee to disclose access information to the employer in order for the employer to gain access to or operate an employer-provided (or employer-paid) electronic communications device provided by virtue of the employee’s employment relationship or used for the employer’s business purposes.
  • Discharge or discipline employees for transferring proprietary or confidential information or financial data to the employee’s personal Internet account without the employer’s authorization.
  • If the employer has reasonable cause, conduct an investigation or require an employee to cooperate in an investigation of any alleged unauthorized transfer of the employer’s proprietary or confidential information or financial data to the employee’s personal Internet account or to conduct an investigation of any other alleged employment-related misconduct, violation of the law or violation of the employer’s work rules. During the investigation, the employer can require the employee to grant access to or allow observation of the employee’s personal Internet account, but may not require the employee to disclose access information for that account.
  • Restrict or prohibit an employee’s access to certain Internet sites, while using an employer-provided (or paid for) electronic communications device, or while the employee is using the employer’s network or other resources.
  • View, access or use information about an employee or applicant that can be obtained without access information or that is available in the public domain.
  • Request or require an employee to disclose his or her personal electronic mail address.

A person who has been discharged, expelled, disciplined, or otherwise discriminated against for reasons provided under this law may file a complaint with Wisconsin’s Department of Workforce Development (the “DWD”).

Employers should make sure that their employment policies and practices conform to the requirements of 2013 Wisconsin Act 208. In particular, employers should make sure that employees using employer-provided or paid for electronic communication devices for business purposes do not have any expectation of privacy in such devices or the communications that flow from them.

In addition, employees should be informed that they are prohibited from disclosing proprietary or confidential information or financial data to anyone using personal Internet accounts and only for legitimate business reasons if using an employer-provided account. Lastly, employers should make sure that their employment policies are clear in reserving the right to conduct, and in expecting employees to cooperate in, investigations concerning the unauthorized transfer of proprietary, confidential or financial information.

Article By:

Of:

Facebook for Attorneys: How to Double Your Likes in No Time

The Rainmaker Institute mini logo (1)

Yesterday’s post detailed how business attorneys can double their connections on LinkedIn, but for consumer attorneys the most likely social media platform for your attention is Facebook.

And just like all social media networks, the lion’s share of the attention goes to those who interact frequently – and genuinely – with followers and fans.

Knowing how valuable and limited your time may be for social media marketing, you need to make efficient use of it to get the maximum benefit.  The infographic below from WhoIsHostingThis.com gives you specific steps you can take to double your Facebook “likes” in just five minutes a day:

Facebook Social Media Likes

Article By:

Of: