login-customizer domain was triggered too early. This is usually an indicator for some code in the plugin or theme running too early. Translations should be loaded at the init action or later. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 6.7.0.) in /home1/natiopq9/public_html/wp-includes/functions.php on line 6131The post The Ten Commandments of Drafting a Social Networking Policy appeared first on The National Law Forum.
]]>
You’ve probably heard this “fact”: if Facebook was a country, it would be the fourth largest country in the world! Web 2.0 has infiltrated every aspect of our lives, including the workplace. As a result, most lawsuits in which employers become mired are fraught with electronic data issues. To guard against a wide range of legal claims, as well as reap the benefits of a global marketplace, many employers are instituting social networking policies. But, as with any policy, a social networking policy must be carefully drafted to meet your business needs. With that, I introduce to you the 10 Commandments of drafting a social networking policy:
NUMBER ONE: Thou shalt NOT use a sample policy pulled willy-nilly from the Internet.
While your search results will pull up dozens of fine looking policies, you won’t know who wrote them, the legal jurisdiction from which they hale, or the business interests the policy seeks to promote. Many times, a bad policy is worse than no policy at all.
NUMBER TWO: Thou SHALT work in harmony to craft a policy appropriate for your business.
If you decide that a social networking policy is appropriate for your business (and it may not be), the combined cooperation of your IT department, human resources, legal, and company decision-makers is necessary to formulate an effective policy.
NUMBER THREE: Thou SHALT know the risks and guard against them.
Employee use of social networking media can have wide-ranging legal ramifications for employers. Possible claims include: harassment, discrimination, defamation, invasion of privacy, and a variety of statutory violations.
NUMBER FOUR: Thou SHALT proclaim that the eye of the employer sees all.
Notify employees that they have no expectation of privacy in their use of company technology, that their activities should be work related only, and that their communications may be accessed at any time.
NUMBER FIVE: Thou shalt NOT take the name of the employer in vain.
The policy should require disclaimers be used indicating that the opinions stated therein are those of the employee and not the employer.
NUMBER SIX: Thou SHALT respect thy co-workers, customers, competitors, and employer.
Require employees to act respectfully in their social networking/blogging activities. Provide guidance on what is and what is not appropriate behavior.
NUMBER SEVEN: Thou shalt NOT steal or do other really bad things with your employer’s computer.
The policy should prohibit disclosure of confidential information, the use of legally-protected/copyrighted information, and the dissemination of personal information of co-workers.
NUMBER EIGHT: Thou SHALT know the consequences of thy actions.
Inform your employees that their social networking activities on the job are subject to all company policies and explain the consequences of violating your social networking policy.
NUMBER NINE: Thou SHALT spread the word throughout the masses.
Distribute the policy. Have your employees sign off on their receipt and understanding of the policy. Provide training on the policy.
NUMBER TEN: Thou shalt NOT commit random acts of destruction.
You MUST ensure that your litigation hold policy incorporates procedures and methodologies to capture and preserve social networking data in the event of litigation.
© 2010 Steptoe & Johnson PLLC All Rights Reserved
About the Author:
Vanessa Goddard’s primary focus is in the area of labor and employment law. She has been involved in representing clients in various employment cases, including sexual harassment, deliberate intent, age, race, and disability discrimination, wrongful discharge, and various other employment-related torts. She is admitted to various state and federal courts as well as the Third Circuit Court of Appeals and Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. 304-598-8158 /www.steptoe-johnson.com
The post The Ten Commandments of Drafting a Social Networking Policy appeared first on The National Law Forum.
]]>The post Twitter Do’s & Twitter Don’ts appeared first on The National Law Forum.
]]>With millions of unique visitors each month, Twitter is still at the top of the social media game. Some people still use Twitter to catalog boring details of the day. However, savvy and smart users realize Twitter’s usefulness as a concise way of marketing and reaching out to consumers and media. Read the following do’s & don’ts to continue being one of the savvy and smart users.
Copyright © 2010 TC Public Relations
This posting is republished with permission from the Chicago Lawyer Magazine Blog “Around the Watercooler” located at: http://h20cooler.wordpress.com/2010/
About the Author:
Tom Ciesielka, President of TC Public Relations, has worked in public relations, marketing and business development for more than 25 years and has enjoyed working with clients ranging from law firms to distinguished authors to national and local companies. He feels privileged to have established trusting working relationships with these clients and values every opportunity he gets to help businesses grow. He is also a former board member of the Legal Marketing Association in Chicago and has spoken at Chicago Bar Associations CLE programs. 312-422-1333 / www.tcpr.net
The post Twitter Do’s & Twitter Don’ts appeared first on The National Law Forum.
]]>The post National Law Review's Student Legal Writing Contest – October is Health Care Month! appeared first on The National Law Forum.
]]>
The post National Law Review's Student Legal Writing Contest – October is Health Care Month! appeared first on The National Law Forum.
]]>The post Navigating the Internal Revenue Service’s Industry Issue Focus Program: Ten Guidelines for Taxpayers appeared first on The National Law Forum.
]]>
Background
In March 2007, the Large and Mid-Size Business Division (“LMSB”) of the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) implemented new procedures for the “Industry Issue Focus Program” (the “Program”). LMSB has since begun reorganizing into the Large Business and International Division (“LB&I”), and the IRS now also refers to the Industry Issue Focus Program as “Issue Tiering,” but the principles underlying the Program remain the same. The Issue Tiering approach is a very significant change in the IRS’s approach to recurring issues and can present unique audit challenges, particularly for taxpayers who are unfamiliar with the Program’s procedures. Nonetheless, it also presents opportunities for taxpayers that use the information available under the Program to position themselves better for audit.
The Program is the latest effort to consolidate the IRS approach to certain common issues presented by multiple taxpayers. Such issues are now considered with an unprecedented level of coordination across taxpayers and industries. Taxpayers and their advisors have frequently expressed the concern that the Program causes inflexibility and results in an inappropriate one-size-fits-all approach to issues that fails to consider distinguishing facts. It removes discretion from the line agents who work with individual taxpayers as well. The IRS has stated its goals for the Program are: (i) consistency in resolution across industry lines; (ii) improved currency; (iii) increased coverage of non-compliant taxpayers by maximizing limited resources; and (iv) greater oversight on and accountability for important issues. As recently as June of this year, LMSB area counsel Nancy Vozar Knapp attempted to reassure taxpayers by stating that the Program was under review and will “evolve with the times.”[1]
This article explains some basic facts about the Program and offers a list of guidelines for taxpayers facing audit issues that have been designated for participation in the Program. Understanding the rationales and goals of the Program and how the Program actually works is key to handling a case involving an issue that has been designated as a “tiered issue.” Although the Program presents challenges, its procedures also provide opportunities to understand the IRS’s approach to an issue in advance in order to develop your strategy and defense.
The basic concept of the Program is that the IRS identifies compliance issues and then prioritizes those issues based on their prevalence and level of compliance risk. This prioritization is implemented by designating issues using a series of “tiers.” Issues that have been so designated are generally referred to as “tiered issues.”
Tier I issues are identified by the IRS as issues of high strategic importance that have a significant impact on one or more industries. There are two categories of issues within Tier I: (i) compliance issues and (ii) shelter issues. According to the IRS, Tier I identification does not necessarily mean a transaction or issue is “bad,” but rather indicates that the transaction or issue presents considerations that are of high importance. Unfortunately, anecdotal evidence suggests that agents in the field do associate a negative, “shelter-like” connotation with any Tier I issue. Tier II issues are identified by the IRS as issues where there is potentially high non-compliance and/or a significant compliance risk. Tier III issues are generally industry-related and designated because of their prevalence, not necessarily because of their importance or risk level.
Issues are classified by the Industry Directors. Potential Tier I or Tier II issues are presented to a group called the Compliance Strategy Council for approval. If approved, an issue is assigned to the primary affected industry executive or another issue executive to develop a compliance strategy. Once an issue has been fully developed and a resolution strategy prepared, it will move from “active” status in its tier to a “monitoring” status in the same tier. The IRS does not typically “demote” issues from higher-priority to lower-priority tiers. According to the IRS, an issue is considered eligible for “monitoring” status when the Issue Management Team (“IMT”) responsible for the issue has: (i) identified the universe of returns that are likely to contain the issue; (ii) provided the necessary direction to the Field; (iii) issued appropriate procedural guidance and legal position; (iv) developed a resolution strategy; and (v) determined that there is no need to continue the heightened level of oversight.
If you have an issue that is designated as a tiered issue, that issue will likely be more difficult to resolve, given the IRS’s coordinated approach. You will face a very strong, pre-conceived notion on the part of the IRS as to how the issue should come out. However, following a few guidelines can give you the best chance to use the Program to your advantage and achieve the best possible resolution under the circumstances.
1. Be Proactive Before and During Your Audit.
You need to know whether you may have a tiered issue before your audit. Accordingly, it is important to research the different issues that have been designated as tiered issues and have a general understanding of the types of issues the IRS considers for the Program.
For most tiered issues, the IRS has published guidelines, which include an analysis of the issue and the pertinent facts, directions to agents on how to develop the issue, and Model Information Document Requests (“IDRs”). If an issue has been designated, you must use this guidance to your advantage. These published materials tell you what the IRS will ask to see and what facts it views as problematic. Try to structure your transactions not to share those difficult facts. Be sure you develop and maintain the specific types of information that you know the agent will demand. Where the materials describe the scope of the issue, use that information to position your transaction outside of the definition or to make sure your transaction is as strongly defensible as possible.
You also need to understand the facts in IRS guidance and work proactively to distinguish your facts from those described in the guidance even before the inevitable audit commences and as you present those facts to the examination agent. Being prepared to address the issues that you know will be raised will put you in the best position possible. Recognize that your response to IDRs may be critical in defining the direction the examiners take. Proceed cautiously during the initial stages of an audit and be careful not to let an agent mistakenly label an issue or transaction as tiered because it has some similarity to a tiered issue.
2. Develop a Good Relationship with the Agent.
An agent’s general impressions of a taxpayer may influence his or her interpretation of transactions. This is purely common sense. Where you develop a relationship of mutual respect and work to keep the audit current, the agent will more readily accept your representations and consider your arguments. If the agent perceives you as unduly hostile or obstructionist, he will be more skeptical of your representations and less receptive to your arguments.
As it relates to tiered issues, if you take steps to cooperate with the agent by providing information as requested and generally make efforts to keep the audit moving, the agent may be more willing to consider your arguments that a transaction falls outside of the tiered issues, or at least go to bat for you in presenting his or her report to the IRS issue specialist or issue owner executive. The tone the agent takes may have a significant impact on the issue specialist or issue owner’s involvement with the issue. Do not wait until the last second to provide information or to establish a working relationship with the agent—establish a good relationship from the beginning so you can work to “manage” the examination as much as possible. The agent is the gatekeeper, and it is better he trusts you. Understand that a good relationship will not cause an agent not to do his job, but it can help your arguments against an issue’s being a tiered issue gain a foothold.
3. Distinguish Your Facts.
One of the most critical tasks in handling a tiered issue is to distinguish your facts from those described in negative IRS guidance and from those of other taxpayers. You should take steps to be prepared early in your audit to present your specific facts to the examining agent and highlight the differences. Sometimes this may be difficult if the guidance is vague and the facts described are generic. However, the more specific facts that you can develop with respect to your own case, the better chance you will have to identify distinctions and convince the IRS your case is different. Doing so is the best opportunity to avoid having your transaction mistakenly labeled as a tiered issue. Once that label is assigned, it will be much more difficult to resolve the issue on audit.
4. Don’t Rely Too Heavily on Arguing the Law With the Examining Agent.
There is a tendency among practitioners to believe that they can fashion a compelling legal argument that will change the IRS’s mind. However, the IRS has very bright, capable tax specialists who analyze these issues extensively, and believe they have fully considered all sides, so the chances of getting them to change their view of the law are remote. The IRS legal position on an issue that has been designated as a tiered issue is developed with consideration by multiple parties. Any one person responsible for handling your issue will not have authority to reverse or modify that position himself or herself. In almost all cases, the examining agent will understand that the Service’s issue experts have fully vetted the law, and will take a very pro-IRS view of the law. Thus, neither agents nor the IMTs will be particularly receptive to your view of legal arguments that others at the IRS have considered as a group. Unless you have an argument that you feel confident that the IRS has never considered, you are better off focusing on ways to distinguish your facts.
5. Understand How the IRS Approaches Your Issue.
As noted above, if you have an issue that has been designated, read the guidance published by the IRS on that issue. IRS guidance may include directives, settlement guidelines, audit guidelines, notices, rulings, coordinated issue papers, regulations, and other published materials. This not only helps you in planning and implementing transactions, but also aids during the audit. Compare your facts to those described in the guidance and answer the following questions: Do your facts appear to be better or worse than the facts in the guidance? How has the IRS approached this issue in this past? What is the IRS record on this issue with respect to other taxpayers? The answers to these questions will influence your strategy in pursuing a resolution to the issue.
6. Understand the IRS’s General Litigation Strategy on Tiered Issues.
Anecdotal evidence has generally led practitioners to believe that the IRS’s strategy with respect to tiered issues is to identify the cases with the worst facts for the taxpayer and get those cases into court. The IRS is therefore likely to try to delay or settle cases with better facts early on in an issue’s development so it can develop law favorable to the IRS by trying cases with facts unfavorable to the taxpayer. Understanding this dynamic, you should work to position your case as a case that the IRS does not want to try in court and would rather settle. Pushing your case forward quickly when it is strong may force the IRS’s hand, so that your case does not become the test case for an issue. If your case has good facts, allowing it to languish is a mistake. That means that you need to double your efforts to stick to deadlines and provide quick responses to all reasonable IDRs on all issues under examination so as not to provide the tools of delay. It may even mean not agreeing to statute extensions that will keep your case from court. In the most extreme cases, you may have to pay the tax, and file a refund claim, to move your case more quickly if being the test case for an issue is your chosen route.
7. Consider How Your Case Fits in With the IRS General Litigation Strategy.
You should learn as much as you can about the cases on the IRS docket with respect to your issue. Is the IRS litigating these cases? What are the facts in these cases? What are the strengths and weaknesses of the cases that are further along in the IRS administrative process or in the courts than yours? Identifying the range of cases that exist and where your case falls in the spectrum between the most-IRS favorable and the most-taxpayer favorable cases can help you select the best strategy. Do not fall into the common trap of convincing yourself your case is the best, without developing more information.
8. Coordinate With Other Taxpayers With Similar Issues.
If possible, make an effort to identify other taxpayers with similar issues and learn their facts. Learn how the IRS is approaching your issue with other taxpayers. You may be able to exchange information with other taxpayers and work collectively to accelerate the strongest taxpayer’s case and delay the weaker ones. If the issue is new and the IRS is still formulating its approach, getting cases with favorable facts to the forefront may influence the pattern IDRs issued by the IRS, alter the IRS’s legal position, and present the IRS with reasons to give examining agents more flexibility to settle cases.
For example, if you believe that you have a strong case and your issue has not been tested in the courts, put pressure on the audit team to move quickly to make your case one of the first. As noted above, if you can convince the IRS that you have strong facts, there is a good chance the IRS will not want your case to be the test case and therefore will be more willing to engage in meaningful settlement discussions.
9. Consider Elevating the Case.
If you are having difficulty resolving your case administratively, consider elevating the case within the IRS to get a new, more senior person involved. The IRS has said that its goal is to resolve cases at the lowest possible level. Thus, a lower level person at the IRS may be reluctant to seek guidance from more senior personnel unless you push for that. Under the normal IRS Rules of Engagement, the seniority progresses as follows: (i) Team manager; (ii) Territory manager; and (iii) Director of Field Operations. The Director of Field Operations has a direct line of communication with the “issue owner executive” responsible for the IRS’s coordinated approach to the issue. The issue owner executive is usually not involved in specific cases, but at least one IRS official has said informally that a taxpayer may want to contact the issue owner executive if he/she has tried to elevate the case under normal channels without success. Sometimes, only a high level official will have the authority or experience necessary to make the decision that a set of facts that looks like a tiered issue is not one.
10. Understand Settlement Procedures.
There are special procedures that apply to the settlement of tiered issues. Make sure that you understand these procedures before you start negotiations towards a resolution. The exam team must present any proposed settlements of tiered, listed issues (i.e., Tier I shelter issues) to the Technical Advisor, Issue Specialist, and/or Counsel before going forward with any resolution other than full concession by the taxpayer unless there are settlement guidelines. Otherwise, whether the proposed settlement of a tiered, non-listed issue needs to be presented to the Issue Management Team may depend on the following circumstances: (i) issue “maturity” (i.e., how well-developed the IRS position is, whether other cases have been settled, etc.); (ii) whether Counsel has provided published guidance; (iii) whether the issue has been designated for litigation; and (iv) whether the issue is being considered for litigation in a different case.
Note that the settlement of other, non-tiered issues you may have during your audit may also be more difficult when you also have a tiered issue. The presence of the tiered issue may cause your examining agent or appeals officer to view such issue as already decided in favor of the IRS. Thus, you as the taxpayer may lose the opportunity to trade a concession on that issue for the IRS’s concession on another issue. While no one likes to think of an audit as a “horse trading” exercise, as a practical matter an audit is a series of negotiations that involves “gives” and “takes” by both taxpayers and the IRS.
Note that the special Fast Track settlement procedures may be available to resolve tiered issues. Under Fast Track, the parties agree to seek a resolution within 120 days. This accelerated time frame may conserve taxpayer resources and allow a case to be resolved before other unfavorable cases either cause the IRS to impose inflexible settlement guidelines or result in unfavorable court decisions. Moreover, it may also help convince the IRS team that you do not have a tiered issue if a more independent third party thinks the distinctions you are making are legitimate.
The taxpayer, exam team, IMT coordinator, and Fast Track coordinator all must agree to use Fast Track. It is better to get support from the exam team first because the exam team manager can contact the other constituencies and be helpful in obtaining the necessary approvals. If Fast Track appears to be an attractive option, be prepared to address the views and concerns of all constituencies. For example, IRS Appeals may look for settlements that can be used in other cases. Remember that Fast Track is a mediation process, so the taxpayer should be prepared to compromise. Do not use Fast Track and expect to receive a full, or near-full concession from the IRS parties involved.
The Industry Issue Focus Program presents unique challenges because the IRS may be more inflexible as a result of the coordinated approach to issues established through the Program. However, taxpayers that are proactive and aware of these challenges can still achieve favorable resolutions.
© 2010 STEPTOE & JOHNSON LLP, ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
About the Author:
Matthew D. Lerner is a partner in the Washington-based law firm of Steptoe & Johnson LLP, where he is a member of the Litigation and Business Solutions Departments. He represents both corporations and high net worth individuals involved in tax controversies, from pre-audit advice about transaction documentation, file organization and privilege protection, to representation during IRS audits and appeals, through litigation in the Federal Courts. His experience is broad and includes cases involving repair and rehabilitation expenses, asset classification for depreciation purposes, losses from trading in securities and derivatives, corporate restructuring, domestic production activities, international intercorporate transactions, foreign tax credits, tax accounting method questions, and valuation issues. Matt also advises clients facing legal and public relations crises, coordinating responses to congressional inquiries, criminal investigations, civil litigation, public relations scrutiny, and agency review.
Matt received his J.D. from Harvard Law School, magna cum laude, and was editor of Harvard Law Review. He received his A.B. from Amherst College, Phi Beta Kappa. 202-429-8024 / www.Steptoe.com
The post Navigating the Internal Revenue Service’s Industry Issue Focus Program: Ten Guidelines for Taxpayers appeared first on The National Law Forum.
]]>The post Social Media Policy Drafting: What are the Ethical Risks & Pitfalls? appeared first on The National Law Forum.
]]>
Today, social media encompasses a broad sweep of online activity, all of which is trackable and traceable. These networks include not only the blogs you write and those to which you comment, but also social networks. Each day brings new online tools and new advances introduce new opportunities to build your virtual footprint.
As a law firm, social media can help drive business initiatives and support professional development efforts. In basic business terms social media can be considered the least expensive form of large scale advertising. However, social media is not exclusively used for business by law firm employees. When it comes to expressing opinions about anything having to do with the law, firm employees are in a position that requires limitations and have certain limitations. Statements in public forums may inadvertently create an attorney-client relationship, and they may also violate the rules prohibiting law firm advertising. The wrong communication can be construed as exposing firm or client secrets; invasion of privacy and defamation; trademark violations; and may even lead to wrongful termination claims. Therefore, a law firm must attempt to provide reasonable guidelines for online behavior by members of the firm.
The following are five (5) ethical areas that all law firms should address when drafting internal social media policies. These can also be utilized by law departments when dealing with lawyer and non-lawyer employees. All of these rules are simply an extension of model rules of professional conduct & state rules of ethics. The over arching principles should remain the same as new social media sites and technologies emerge.
Marketing and advertising are key functions for any business survival. However, lawyers, especially in law firms, are held to a higher standard when advertising through electronic means. Model Rule of Professional Conduct 7.2[1] states a lawyer or law firm may advertise through written, recorded or electronic means. This includes all social media sites.
| Quick Reference | |
Do
Do NOT
|
|
Example: A law firm creates a site on Facebook, MySpace, LinkedIn, Twitter, etc. using the firm name. Is this advertising?
Example: An employee of a law firm uses the firm name or firm email address on their personal Facebook site. Is this advertising?
State ethics boards consider the true crux of the advertising issue to be not who creates the site or the intent of the site but rather whether or not the site can be considered to be used for professional use. If being used for professional use, social media presence and communication can be considered to fall within the advertising rules.
Below are a few guidelines to include in firm policies to teach your employees (lawyers and non-lawyers) how not to create a professional site unless intended.
This subject is difficult to approach with employees. Many will argue it is the same as verbally telling someone they work at a specific law firm. However, state boards have compared the online activity to a law firm website vs. verbal communication. The best approach is helping employees understand how not to blur the lines of professional/ personal sites for their own protection. As an employer, you want employees to continue using social media sites to broaden and help promote the firm brand. However, you only want them to do it in the most ethical way.
The attorney-client relationship is one of the oldest legal ethical standards. It creates a certain set of duties the lawyer owes the client. The model rules of professional conduct set forth a series of guidelines that help regulate the creation and existence of this important relationship. In the electronic world, especially when utilizing social media, the important issue is whether any electronic communication creates an attorney-client relationship inadvertently.
| Quick Reference | |
Do
Do NOT
|
|
Example: A lawyer of firm ABC is blogging on a social media site regarding new tax laws. A non-client comments to the blog inquiring about his specific tax situation. The lawyer in turn comments again discussing how the new tax laws apply to the non-client. Has an attorney-client relationship been created?
Law firms presently use disclaimers for emails and firm websites to verify no implied relationship is created. But how do we instruct employees to this standard when social media sites are interactive by nature? Below are a few key policy guidelines to help employees navigate this difficult area.
Client confidentiality and business privacy are two of the largest concerns of employers when dealing with social media communication. Generally, a lawyer shall not reveal information relating to the representation of a client unless the client gives informed consent. In addition, privacy of the organization, the business processes, the firm brand and the IP of the firm are key for business continuity.
| Quick Reference | |
Do
Do NOT
|
|
Example: A lawyer begins discussing a case he is handling on his personal Facebook blog. Although not referencing the client name, details of the case are discussed. Has the client confidentiality been broken?
Example: A law firm employee tweets about a firm staff meeting discussing salary and new hires. Has the privacy of business been destroyed?
Law firms must address confidentiality and privacy standards in social media policies. In addition, consequences for breaking these standards should also be detailed. Below are a few policy considerations to navigate this area.
| Quick Reference | |
Do
Do NOT
|
|
Many lawyers are considered experts or specialists by their peers in select areas of law. However, using the expert designation can only be done with appropriate approval. Model Rule of Professional Conduct 7.4 generally states that a lawyer may communicate the fact that the lawyer does or does not practice in particular fields of law. In addition, a lawyer may promote the engagement in specific areas of practice. However, a lawyer shall NOT state or imply that a lawyer is an expert or a certified specialist unless the lawyer has been certified by an organization that is accredited by the ABA or the state bar.
This model rule affects the use of credentials and recommendations on social media sites. What are the key areas to include in law firm policies?
Expertise and specialization is heavily regulated at the state level. Some states have gone further in their restricted verbiage. State rules of ethics should be reviewed prior to any policy drafting.
The final social media ethics concern revolves around general law firm and lawyer communication. In personal and especially professional communication, all communications must be truthful and accurate.
| Quick Reference | |
Do
Do NOT
|
|
Law firms and law departments should consider the following general policy guidelines when drafting social media policies.
As discussed in this article, there are many ethical considerations when law firms and their employees decided to use social media sites. Similar to email emerging as the main form of business communication ten (10) years ago, social media is now the communication wave of the future. This new format is how the next generation of leaders presently lives and communicates day to day. The legal community must embrace the new technology and the opportunity to educate employees.
©2010 Baker, Donelson, Bearman, Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC. All Rights Reserved.
Meredith L. Williams is Baker Donelson’s Director of Knowledge Management. Although trained as a lawyer, she is not actively engaged in the practice of law. Instead, she oversees BakerNet, the Firm’s industry-leading intranet, and coordinates strategic growth on behalf of the Firm in knowledge management, competitive intelligence and technology. Ms. Williams is widely recognized as a leading authority in knowledge management issues for the legal field, and is a frequent presenter and author on knowledge management and competitive intelligence.
Ms. Williams is a member of the Association of Women Attorneys and the American, Tennessee and Memphis Bar Associations. In addition, Ms. Williams is Conference Vice President for the International Legal Technology Association 2010-2011. She is a recipient of the Dean’s Distinguished Service Award from the University Of Memphis Cecil C. Humphreys School Of Law for her volunteer work. 901-577-2353 / www.BakerDonelson.com
The post Social Media Policy Drafting: What are the Ethical Risks & Pitfalls? appeared first on The National Law Forum.
]]>The post Practice Descriptions and SEO: Distinguish Your Firm from the Competition appeared first on The National Law Forum.
]]>
Differentiating your firm’s legal services from those of another firm is one of the basic tenants of legal marketing. Many firms offer the same general legal practices that directly compete with other firms for the top spots in legal rankings and search engine results. Fortunately, search engines are predictable creatures that use objective measurements to determine in what order websites are ranked. Below are a few suggestions on how to craft the most effective practice description in order to maximize search engine visibility.
Long-tail Keywords. Each practice has key phrases, usually names of specific laws or regulations, that are unique to that particular practice. It is important to identify these industry-specific keywords and include them in an appropriate place within the practice description. Using long-tailed keywords, such as “EU data protection directive,” will have the added benefit of generating traffic from visitors who have in-depth knowledge about the specific industry as opposed to more generic keywords, such as “climate change,” that will cast a wide and rather ambiguous net.
Keyword Variation. Some practices, like international arbitration, have standardized names that are used universally by almost all firms who offer that practice area. Other practices have different names that describe the same general practice area. For example, a practice may be called “Business Restructuring & Reorganization” at one firm and “Bankruptcy, Restructuring & Creditors’ Rights” at another. Even if there might be slight distinctions in their niche expertise, they are generally targeting the same sector of the legal community. Although the name of the practice should remain consistent throughout the description, not including other commonly searched alternative forms of the practice within the text will limit your reach.
Inbound Links. One of most powerful ways to raise a practice area’s search engine rank is to increase the number of inbound links to the practice description. The more links that lead to your content, the more weight search engines will give to the ranking, and the more traffic will be directed to your practice area description. There are many opportunities to place a link to a practice description on your current material, including blogs, client alerts, and other related practices.
Intelligent Design. Search engines use header, sub header, bullet, and boldface tags to determine the content of a webpage. Using these elements to structure practice area descriptions will not only make your content more comprehensible to search engines, but also present your information more effectively to website visitors.
Consider the Medium. Practice descriptions used for the website should not be the same length as practice descriptions used in proposals and other print materials. By using a practice area description that spans several pages, you are inadvertently sabotaging its chances of appearing in search results. Search engines use complex algorithms that calculate the frequency of keywords divided by the overall length of the content and thus long practice descriptions will dilute the keywords you use to categorize your law practice.
While incorporating any one of these elements into your practice’s website description will be beneficial, it is critical to keep in mind that effective SEO is dependent upon multiple components that work in unison to produce the desired effect. Furthermore, many of these recommendations can be extrapolated to attorney biographies, as they are another opportunity to distinguish your firm from the competition.
DISCLAIMER. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Hunton & Williams LLP.
Originally published in the Summer 2010 issue of LMA Practice Marketing Newsletter Copyright 2010 Legal Marketing Association –The Virginias Chapter.
Authored By Lauren Hum:
Lauren Hum is a Marketing Technology Specialist at Hunton & Williams LLP and lives in Richmond, Virginia. Ms. Hum is a Communications & Technology committee member for the Legal Marketing Association’s Virginia Chapter and a board member for the William & Mary Richmond Alumni Chapter.
The post Practice Descriptions and SEO: Distinguish Your Firm from the Competition appeared first on The National Law Forum.
]]>The post BP Mismanages a Coffee Spill and the Best of @BPGlobalPR appeared first on The National Law Forum.
]]>Here is the funniest attack I’ve seen. From the Upright Citizens Brigade, it’s a spoof of how BP would try to handle a boardroom coffee spill. (There is one instance of NSFW language at the end.)
Good stuff.
And coming in at a close second is the fake BP public relations Twitter feed. If you’re not familiar, many companies use the social media site Twitter to inform the public of their latest news and offerings. And someone has created a satirical @BPGlobalPR account that sends out frequent humorous updates laced with acerbic cynicism for how BP is handling this mess. Often accompanied by the sarcastic “#bpcares” disclaimer, the account advocates charity causes such as offering ”free bpcares” t-shirts that you can purchase for $25. (You can read more about @BPGlobalPR here and here.)
Here are the cleverest updates from the account so far:
SPOILER ALERT: The leak stops eventually, everyone forgets about it and we all buy another vacation home. #cantwait
Found driftwood that looks like Jesus crying oil. Not sure what it means but we’re charging 20 bucks to see it. #bpcares
If we’re being accused of being criminals, we want to be tried by a jury of our peers — wealthy execs who don’t give a damn. #fairisfair
I’ve gotta say, at night the gulf really doesn’t look that bad. #bpcares
OMG This isss ridciulsus. playing a drinking gamee where we drink a shot everytme we seeee an oily birdddd!!! LOL! so wasted!!11 #pbcares
What a gorgeous day! The ocean is filled with the most beautiful rainbows! #yourewelcome #bpcares
They want to fine us $4,300 for every barrel of oil spilled? Umm, we’re not spilling barrels, the oil is going directly into the gulf. DUH
A bird just stole my sandwich! You deserve everything you get, nature!!! #bpcares
If Top Kill doesn’t work, we’re just gonna toss a giant “Get Well Soon” card into the gulf and hope for the best. #bpcares
Just wrapped up a meeting with the EPA. Terry kept farting out loud at all the right moments. Not sure how he does it, but it’s SO FUNNY!
Funny, no one has thanked us for seasons 3-15 of Treme yet. #bpcares
The good news: Mermaids are real. The bad news: They are now extinct. #bpcares
Catastrophe is a strong word, let’s all agree to call it a whoopsie daisy.
Beverly Hillbillies marathon on TBS – now THESE guys knew what to do with an oil leak!
Not only are we dropping a top hat on the oil spill, we’re going to throw in a cane and monocle as well. Keeping it classy.
The above article is reprinted from the Risk Management Monitor – the official blog of Risk Management magazine.
Reprinted with permission from the Risk Management Monitor. Copyright 2010 Risk and Insurance Management Society, Inc. All rights reserved.
The post BP Mismanages a Coffee Spill and the Best of @BPGlobalPR appeared first on The National Law Forum.
]]>The post Why Attorneys Should Be Working with the Press, Instead of Against Them appeared first on The National Law Forum.
]]>
Solo practitioners and attorneys from small law firms often resist public relations. They cite not having enough time, a lack of understanding of its role, or the dearth of resources, to make public relations part of their business development plans. Coupled with stereotypes of the press, such as reporters only going to the big law firms or only wanting the drama and not the facts, it’s no surprise that media relations is relegated to the bottom of business development activities, particularly if the firm has already achieved some “visibility” that did not result in new clients.
The reality is that public relations is an indispensable part of business development strategy for every firm, regardless of size. Getting quoted in news stories, both in targeted industry publications and mainstream media, is one of the most cost-effective ways of securing exposure. A good public relations plan serves several purposes: it builds reputation and visibility, allows firms, practice areas and solo practitioners to become known, liked and trusted in their target market, and finally—and most importantly— helps to bring more business.
Before embarking on a public relations plan, you must ensure that all of the firm’s marketing communications materials, such as blogs, Web sites, newsletters and e-zines, address the “What’s in it for me question for prospects and that differentiation is clear. The next step is to target the industry publications and media outlets that your target market reads.
Whether you’re a firm that is working with public relations consultants or implementing the plan with internal resources, or you’re a solo practitioner implementing it on your own, the following considerations will make your media relations plan a lot more focused and effective.
Who are my clients? What do they read? Do they read online publications? Knowing the answers to these questions will guide your choices of the publications to target, whether they are local dailies, weeklies, magazines or trade/professional journals. While being quoted in The New York Times is prestigious, it’s meaningless if your target market doesn’t read that publication. There are attorneys who want media exposure for personal reasons, but often this is in direct conflict with the targeted media relations campaign.
Finally, it is absolutely imperative to recognize and understand that building credibility and visibility does not happen overnight and rarely does it reap immediate results. It may take a nanosecond to destroy a reputation, but to build one takes work, effort and commitment from all the decision makers in the firm. However, with a sustained campaign working in conjunction with other marketing activities, public relations will reap huge dividends.
Paramjit L Mahli is with award winning SCG Legal PR Network. She is a former journalist who has worked with CNN Business News, Canadian Broadcast Corporation and Journal of Commerce. Comprised of small and large firms throughout the USA, SCG Legal PR Network connects legal experts with reporters nationally and internationally. Ms. Mahli is a contributor to Legal Broadcast Network and writes frequently for Technolawyer. She also trains and gives CLEs regularly on media relations and public relations. www.scglegalprnetwork.com
The post Why Attorneys Should Be Working with the Press, Instead of Against Them appeared first on The National Law Forum.
]]>The post Getting Your Firm’s Articles Read by Corporate Counsel appeared first on The National Law Forum.
]]>
In-house attorneys have always been generalists but now, more than ever, as layoffs have hit in-house law departments hard, they must act like ER doctors conducting triage when the ambulance gets in. They have to quickly identify the problem, establish priorities, determine what they can handle themselves, and whether they will require the services of a specialist or outside counsel. So how do articles written by lawyers enter into the mix of helping in-house counsel determine what’s a “Code Blue”?
A Descriptive Headline Helps the Article be Found
From the start, the article’s title sets the tone. Well-read articles have descriptive headlines that also include the relevant industries and jurisdictions involved. Cute headlines may be fun, but in-house counsel aren’t looking for fun in legal articles. If the targeted reader can’t quickly figure out what the article is about, the article won’t get read and the author and his or her law firm won’t reap the benefits. .
In search-engine terms, the title of your article is the most interesting element. The search engine assumes that the title contains all the important words that define the topic of the piece, and thus weights words appearing there most heavily. When writing a title, think about search terms readers will use when looking for articles on the same topic as yours.
Descriptive Headlines Part Two– Sometimes Less Is More
Many legal writers have caught wind that the article title is important to search engines and accordingly try to cram every conceivable keyword into the title. This results in a long, unreadable, and often boring title. Titles should include terms such as “healthcare,” “labor,” and “bankruptcy” for articles that address those issues. For federal cases, mentioning the circuit and district is often important, but it’s rarely necessary to include “the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia” in the title. The word on the street is that Google will display approximately 65-70 characters of a title tag in a search result and will index additional characters in the SERP (Search Engine Results Page). The lesson is don’t blow the first 65 characters of your article’s title on text that does not tell your reader what the article is about and why it is important.
Also, many firms and article syndication services tweet article headlines to drum up more interest. With Twitter you have 140 characters max. Newsletter, journal publishers, and article syndication services have strict title character limits. It’s been said that your title is the face of your writing. If you don’t want a stranger to take a scalpel to your face without your input, be forewarned.
Effective Articles Help the Reader Quickly Assess the Situation
Effective articles succinctly identify the key issues early on in the text. If it’s a new healthcare regulation, does it impact all healthcare organizations or just hospices? Is it just in Illinois or nationwide? Let the reader know what the issue is from the start, then explain why it is important, who is impacted, and what jurisdictions are involved.
Many article-publishing services and law firm Web sites only include short teasers of the article’s content in areas highly accessible to search engines, meaning either the full text is in a less searchable format like PDF or the bulk of the text is behind a password- protected section of the Web site. In addition, many legal writers writing about a local issue bury the jurisdiction at the end of the article hoping that they will draw in more readers. Your readers will be unhappy if they have to log on or wait for a PDF to open only to find out the article only addresses one far-flung jurisdiction. If you want to draw in national readers, why not also include a succinct blurb on the regulations in a few large states like Texas, New York, and California? Your single-state article addresses a broader audience and is more likely to be passed on to other interested readers.
Help Your Reader Make the Sale
Most legal writers include government statistics and tales of multimillion verdicts to draw in the reader. Law departments have to adhere to their budgets, so if they want additional resources (e.g., outside counsel) or resources beyond what is typically budgeted, (e.g.,. high-priced counsel, panel counsel, and local counsel), the assistant counsel must seek permission from the General Counsel,, The General Counsel, in turn, may need authorization from the CEO and/or may need to make his or her case to the Board. Your statistics and case references can be a great start in helping inside counsel make their case. Your articles may also assist CEOs, CFOs, and Board members who do their own research on pertinent legal issues so they can ask informed questions of their General Counsel and form their own opinion of the gravity of particular regulations or litigation issues.
Present Solutions, Not Just Headaches
Whenever possible, don’t just identify problems, try to offer potential solutions or postulate possible outcomes. Establish your credibility by demonstrating your expertise. Simply identifying problems leaves your reader with that “Oh no—now what do I do?” feeling. Offering ideas on how to solve those problems leaves the reader with the “I have a problem and maybe this law firm can help me” feeling.
Jennifer Schaller is Managing Director of the National Law Review, an online magazine and database resource for in-house counsel and other professionals. Jennifer started her legal career at Aon Corporation and has also worked at CNA Financial and Smith Amundsen LLC. Jennifer can be reached at 708-357-3317.
This article originally appeared in the Spring 2010 issue of In the Loop, the Legal Marketing Association Midwest Chapter newsletter, originally published 5/21/2010.
© 2010 Legal Marketing Association — Midwest Chapter
The post Getting Your Firm’s Articles Read by Corporate Counsel appeared first on The National Law Forum.
]]>