It is common for law firm websites to speak about themselves with hyperbole. Self-important adjectives litter the site content. Firm’s with exceptional people are one-upped by those with truly exceptional people. Knowledge is only valid if it isgenuine. Experience, it seems comes in a variety of flavors as well. Some firms havewide experience. For others it is deep experience. But the most common benchmark of experience is that it be extensive. Does your firm claim extensive experience?
Now it’s not that I don’t believe it when I read of a professional’s extensive experience. It’s just that this really doesn’t tell me anything. Worse, it doesn’t tell me anything different from the next guy who also has extensive experience. In fact, I would argue, my baseline is extensive experience. Now tell me how you’re better.
If you Google the phrase “extensive experience” there are over 6 million website pages where this value is claimed. Using the search tool on several law firm websites, I discovered an “extensive experience” ratio of about 35% – 50% (# of appearances of “extensive experience”/attorney). So making this claim doesn’t so much separate one professional from the pack as much as it defines the pack. (Check your firm’s ratio and let me know!)
But the problem with this “extensive experience” language is not merely that it is linguistic laziness. Rather, this laziness results in failing to detail the richness, complexity and detail which this phrase references. And in so not doing, opportunities are lost for using this missing content. You won’t be found in a search engine because, frankly, nobody is looking for “extensive experience.” And you won’t be discovered in your site search because, well, almost half of all attorneys have the same vague amount of experience. And it is all extensive.
Yes, I understand that, often, considerable descriptive detail must be concealed for privacy considerations. Yeah, so? Content developers (copywriters) simply have to work harder to anonymize those involved. But, with a little effort, it is possible and essential to provide sufficient detail to make the stories comprehensible and relevant – and content rich.
Go the extra mile to gather the detail that elicits that sense of extensive experience. Boil it down to 3 to 5 cogent bullet points of industry and matter relevance. And post it. Your site visitor will have a better experience. This will result in more web pages consumed and possibly a longer time on the site with more opportunity for engagement. And search engines will devour the details for their ranking algorithms. And you know how I know this? I have extensive experience.
Sonny works closely with Duo’s clients to develop their online business and marketing strategy. His tactical responsiblities include: Implementing and managing paid search engine campaigns; Consulting on and implementing permission-based email; Providing strategic online marketing consultation to law firms and others using web analytics to help drive website and business performance and Conceputalizing and implementing social media marketing
Sonny has over 30 years of business management and marketing experience, He was a Serial entrepreneur and business marketer as an Apple Computer reseller; Internet partner in the business consulting firm Friedman, Eisenstein, Raemer and Schwartz; Director of Business Development for startup Primecom, an online e-commerce application service provider; and Director of Marketing for NextPart, Inc.. 312-529-3003 / www.duoconsulting.com
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.
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
A helpful article for all Word Press Users out there from the National Law Review’s Business of Law weekly guest bloggers – Duo Consulting. Scott Frazer of Duo goes over a Spam issue that impacted Duo’s Blog and provides a detailed solution on how they fixed the problem!
Our blog was recently affected by a rather clever little hack, and when I went searching for ways to remove it, I couldn’t find much. Here’s a brief writeup of what happened and how I fixed it.
Our Director of Internet Marketing Strategy, Sonny Cohen, spends some of his time searching Google and other search engines for keywords relative to our business. He began noticing that some of those results, while they would return pointers to our blog, were laced with keywords and links to various male enhancement drugs. When I searched our blog for these references, I couldn’t find anything.
Here’s what I was seeing when I would search our blog for the phrase “test”:
But here’s what Google was seeing when it did the same search:
You may notice that the URL in that is to a local file. There are two ways you can see what your site looks like to Google. One is to change the User Agent on your browser to match that of the Googlebot. The other is to use the Webmaster Tool’s “Fetch As Googlebot” lab utility. I used the latter, and saved the resulting report as an HTML file and then opened that file in Chrome.
So why is Google seeing different results than anyone else who visits my site and runs that query? Something different must be happening when Google visits. I started running through the execution path of WordPress. The first file that is accessed is index.php. All this file does is turn on a theming variable and load wp-blog-header.php. So I moved on to that file. It looked like this:
temp.php? Never heard of it, let’s see what’s inside:
eval (gzinflate(base64_decode(
‘vVhtc9pGEP6emfwHRfUUmGLg9IbkhNrUJrZnEsfFOGmKXc1ZOoMmQqInYYea/Pfu’
.’nnjRG6aZzNRj0Em7++yzu3erOw5/fXM4HU9fvnj5Ym8cRnFnz77q9T/2+sPK2WBw’
…snip for length…
.’6reTZEAXdDrl4QNzE/3F3Wy+iKjPxFe0gH7G+ML1IiecBfHiY+LyWLhsVmDlrQ7g’
.’cvonDPkW65UOKh6zCWuM44kvFr6Ialmvw1/fHP4L’
)));
Now that looks evil. Obfuscated code can’t be good. I decided to see what it does by replacing the “eval” with “print” and then I ran “php test.php” from that directory. The results are very long, but you can see them here.
Basically, the program tries to determine if we are a real person or a search engine bot by looking at things like our IP address and our user agent. If it determines we are human, it goes ahead and returns the standard header. If we’re a bot, it serves the content in “theme.html” which is identical to the second screenshot above.
So to clean things up, I removed the reference to temp.php from wp-blog-header.php, deleted the file temp.php and deleted the file theme.html.
Scott supervises Duo’s network facilities, monitoring hardware and software, analyzing problems and ensuring that the network is fully operational. He works closely with clients to identify, interpret and evaluate their system requirements. He also provides the front-line defense of the Duo network by planning, coordinating and implementing network security measures. An avid Mac user, Scott is nonetheless happy to keep Duo’s servers running on Windows Server 2003 and Ubuntu Linux.
Scott has been working in network administration with Internet companies for over ten years. He has experience designing and maintaining networks and server farms for high-traffic sites in both the hosting and e-commerce arenas. As the senior system administrator for MusicToday, an online ticketing, merchandise and fan club portal, he was responsible for the stability and security of large-volume e-commerce sites, including websites for the Rolling Stones, the Grateful Dead and the Dave Mathews Band. www.duoconsulting.com / 312-529-3006
We recently received this question from a law firm marketer. I’ve edited it slightly for brevity and anonymity:
“Our email service is earning a big #fail at this point. We’ve used (Name Brand provider) with great success for small jobs and I’m talking with them about an enterprise solution. Do you have a provider you love (or a crappy one I should be warned away from)? What are the pros and cons of the systems you’ve used?”
The question, submitted to a listserv, engendered responses of affiliation with one ESP or another because they liked them, had no problems, or other good indications of service. But email delivery is more complex than you might first imagine and one size does not fit all. It is not (yet) a commodity. Personal recommendations of quality service or indications of being satisfied are a good start of an evaluation but an insufficient qualifier for engaging an email service provider. Like the acquisition of almost any service (legal or technical) it is important to understand requirements.
This is not intended to be comprehensive but merely to illustrate my point. Get this part and you might get there is more to the story. So let’s take a look at these simple factors:
What does your email subscriber base look like? gmail.com? or bigcompanyname.com?
How big a mailing would you execute at one time?
What is your mailing frequency?
If you send a lot of email frequently to corporate email addresses, the email reputation is critical to getting into the inbox of your subscriber. The better email service providers (ESPs) do 2 things. First, they manage the reputation of the email addresses from which they send the email (their IP addresses). The best ESPs offer you the opportunity to set up your own email address on their system. This will look something like email.lawfirm.com and email will come from something like sonny@email.lawfirm.com So while it still looks like your business, it is isolated from your domain (lawfirm.com) and from the email sending behavior or misbehavior of other clients of this ESP. Are you with me?
What happens if you send an email to a lot of people at the same domain such asxxxx@client.com where xxxx is lots of different people? When all these emails show up @client.com at one time, they look like spam. It may even look like an attack on the email server. The corporate email server receives these emails so you probably see these emails as being delivered. But they never make it into the inbox of the individual email recipients.
The better ESPs offer the capability to throttle the sending of emails so that they don’t look like a spam attack on an email server. It more closely resembles natural email commerce. Good commercial ESPs can afford to throttle the send of their emails. Spammers cannot because they’ve got way too much email to send. Are we getting esoteric yet?
ESPs are commercial companies and not a part of any website development company’s core competency. We have our favorites but we are not linked at the hip. Email services built into CRM systems such as Interaction, Salesforce, etc. are bulk mailers and do not have these deliverability features and a deliverability desk (personnel) focused on managing IP reputation. This doesn’t make them bad by any stretch. But it does affect deliverability performance.
Finally, the best ESPs are becoming messaging companies capable of delivering text messages and voice messages. If your communication strategy is to be first to market with targeted information, you may find that a text message alert system is a client service you haven’t yet considered. It is unlikely that your “economy” bulk email guy who is “friendly to deal with” offers these extended and diversified contact capabilities. And maybe you don’t need it and never will.
Being able to track email performance is a common feature but it is not the test of a quality system. And these tools may not even provide accurate or complete information regarding the effectiveness of your email marketing campaigns. Even the best (i.e. more costly) ESPs come only close to precise. Third party firms like Return Path and Pivotal Veracity might provide this higher level of email evaluation and deliverability improvement.
Price is not always a guarantee that you will get better delivery services like what I’ve identified above. But a low price pretty much guarantees that you will not. For my part, I think reaching targeted contacts for a few pennies is a pretty good deal. If you are driven to cut that penny in half, you should at least know what you are getting and what you aren’t.
Whew! Hope this is helpful. Oh yeah, who do we use? ExactTarget. But remember. One size does not fit all. Think about your requirements.
Sonny works closely with Duo’s clients to develop their online business and marketing strategy. His tactical responsiblities include: Implementing and managing paid search engine campaigns; Consulting on and implementing permission-based email; Providing strategic online marketing consultation to law firms and others using web analytics to help drive website and business performance and Conceputalizing and implementing social media marketing.
The National Law Review’s Business of Law featured blogger is Kristyn J. Sornat of the International Legal Technology Association (ILTA) – who was a panelist at ILTA’s recent annual conference in Las Vegas. Kristyn recaps some of the valuable information she picked up at the conference. Read On:
For the past several years, the International Legal Technology Association (ILTA) has included a one-day marketing technology track at their annual conference. While the track originally focused on client relationship management (CRM) software (namely InterAction), it has grown to include all things related to marketing technology. This year there were four sessions:
I. Web Analytics and Search Engine Optimization: Smart Strategies
II. Using Technology for Successful Events
III. ERM and CRM: Compare and Contrast
IV. Marketing Technology Roundtable
I. Web Analytics and Search Engine Optimization: Smart Strategies
In order to stay competitive it is important that law firms utilize a search engine optimization (SEO) strategy to help improve their rankings in both branded and non-branded searches performed on Google, Yahoo, Bing, etc. This session focused on changes firms can make to their websites to support their SEO goals, including:
Eliminate pages with duplicate content
Name URL’s rather than using numbers
Add metadata to all pages
Create links between pages on your site and use meaningful phrases to describe the content to which you are linking (not just “click here”)
Seek inbound links to pages on your site from reputable sources
Push out your content as much as possible through e-mail distributions, RSS feeds, social media and syndication services – such as the National Law Review.
Also, the session covered the importance of using web analytics to track how your website is performing and whether the changes implemented are successful. Several free web analytics tools are available, including Google Analytics, Yahoo! Web Analytics and Piwik.
This session focused on the increasing importance of e-mail communications for events and tools available to manage those communications. Two e-mail platforms were mentioned that link directly to CRM software: Tikit eMarketing andConcep. The Tikit eMarketing solution requires your firm to have in-house resources to design and send e-mails through your own server. The Concep solution involves a third-party vendor that aides in template design and uses its own servers to distribute your e-mails.
Important things to remember regarding invitations and RSVP forms:
Include disclaimers, the firm’s address and an unsubscribe link (important to comply with CAN-SPAM).
Apply alt tags for all images.
Use a combination of images, background color and text, rather than one big image for your invitation.
Link to a survey in your invitation to find out what people are interested in hearing about.
Link to a survey in your post-event follow-up e-mails to gauge the response of the audience, find out what else they would have liked to learn and their interest in future events.
Cross-market events in appropriate client alerts and other news-like e-mail distributions.
Personalize the e-mail with the recipient’s name in the subject line or body of the e-mail for a better response rate.
Use social media to promote the event to an audience who may not already be familiar with your firm.
III. ERM and CRM: Compare and Contrast
This topic turned into a hot debate among the panelists and drew a large crowd of enterprise relationship management (ERM) and CRM vendors who were anxious to hear how their solutions would be discussed. There were three panelists from different law firms, one with only an ERM solution, one with only a CRM solution and one with both solutions in place. One of the main functions of both ERM and CRM software is tracking “who knows who” among your clients, prospects and referral sources. ERM gathers this information by monitoring e-mail traffic and possibly phone calls of your employees and brings that information into the system automatically. Most CRM systems pull this information from address books in Outlook (and other e-mail systems) and require more active participation from attorneys to be successful.
The message from the panel was that every firm is different, and selecting one or both solutions depends on the culture of your firm and its needs. If you have attorneys who won’t take the time to share their contacts through CRM software and will not object to the information being pulled automatically, an ERM solution may work for you. If you have attorneys who are concerned about privacy and want to be able to do more (such as track business development efforts, e-mail marketing lists and client information), the CRM option is the way to go. If you have a combination of needs, you might look into implementing both solutions.
During the presentation, the panelists were careful not to mention what vendors they used, but did supply the following list of ERM and CRM providers that to cater to the law firm market.
IV. Marketing Technology Roundtable / Hot Trends in Law Firm Marketing Technology
In the fourth session, all panelists from the previous sessions returned to answer audience questions about marketing technology. The first thing discussed was what’s hot or new in the market. Below are some of the advances that are happening now or may be coming your way in the near future.
Websites: Looking at the future of law firm websites, the group saw many changes on the horizon. One panelist described a recent demo she attended from Saturno Design that featured a new tool that essentially sets up a “mapping” feature to deliver customized content to each visitor based on what they viewed during prior visits to your site. Several panelists also predicted a blurring between the traditional law firm site and social media. Examples included pulling content from LinkedIn profiles for attorney bios or replacing the traditional newsletter and alert sections with blogs.
Video:Video was a hot topic throughout the sessions. Many firms have already begun to use this medium on their websites and in their electronic communications, adding a human element that was not possible before. Mary Tomaro, Web and Interactive Marketing Manager for Jones Day, said videos on their website have become quite popular. An important note, if your firm is comfortable using YouTube to host its videos, there are two benefits to this approach: 1) you can save the cost of purchasing software to host them yourself, and 2) you can increase the reach of the videos, as they can be spread virally and are more easily found by search engines.
Mobile Apps: To date, only a select few firms have released applications for use on mobile devices. The panelists saw this as an increasingly important trend as users move away from traditional desktop computers and use their mobile devices and other tools, such as iPads, to search for and read content. Read a blog post describing the recent success of Morrison & Foerster’s iPhone app.
Social Media: Although social media may not be a new tool, many firms have yet to establish a usage policy or firmwide strategy. As you iron out how your firm will utilize social media, keep in mind that relevance is more important than reach – it doesn’t matter if you have 2,000 Twitter followers if the content you give them doesn’t resonate.
Kristyn is Marketing Technology Specialist at Chicago-based Much Shelist. She is responsible for the firm’s CRM database (InterAction), electronic marketing campaigns (from basic HTML design through distribution and analytics) and social media strategy. She also has various duties related to the firm’s Web site, including search engine optimization and Web analytics interpretation. Kristyn was recognized by the International Legal Technology Association (ILTA) with a 2010 Distinguished Peer Award for outstanding achievements in marketing technology at the organization’s annual conference. She has nearly five years of marketing technology experience in a law firm environment.
The National Law Review’s featured Business of Law Guest Blogger Meredith L. Williams of Baker Donelson Bearman Caldwell & Berkowitz, PC outlines some very real concerns for lawyers and law firms related to social media and state bar assocation guidelines. Ms. Williams also offers some very concrete Do’s and Don’t on how to address these concerns. Read on….
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.
Advertising (Model Rule of Professional Conduct 7.2)
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
Have any personal or professional social media site as desired.
Use appropriate disclaimers as needed.
Do NOT
Use the organization’s name or email address on a personal site unless using the appropriate disclaimers.
Use the organization’s assets to update personal sites.
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.
Employees should not associate the firm name or firm email address with the site unless it is intended for professional use. This includes stating they are an employee of the law firm.
Do not use firm assets to update personal sites. This includes any law firm owned laptop or computer, I-Phone or blackberry, firm IP address and email address. Using the firm email address implies the employee is acting on the firm’s behalf.
Create an advertising disclaimer to help employees specifically state their use is personal or professional.
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.
Attorney-Client Relationship (Model Rule of Professional Conduct 1 Series)
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
Post non-legal comments, blogs, etc. on any personal or professional site.
Use appropriate disclaimers as needed.
Do NOT
Post legal advice.
“Friend” anyone on a professional site unless previously corresponded or known.
“Friend” a Judge on a professional site.
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.
Employees should never post legal advice. This does not mean employees cannot comment or post to social media sites. It only relates to publishing or posting that could be construed as legal advice or opinion. If the subject matter is related to a legal or ethical situation, attorneys and staff may only discuss the legal standards but not apply those standards to any particular fact situation.
Firms should provide a disclaimer for employees to utilize when posting or commenting on professional social networking sites.
When using social networks with firm e-mail and professional identification, employees should not “friend” anyone they do not know and/or with whom they have not previously corresponded.
Some states have even gone so far as to also state that lawyers and judges cannot be “friends” on any professional social media sites. State ethics rules should be consulted prior to drafting any policy.
Client Confidentiality (Model Rule of Professional Conduct 1.6)
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
Discuss job generically
Avoid uncontrolled forums.
Be respectful of other’s and the company’s privacy.
Get approval when responding to negative requests.
Do NOT
Discuss job specifics.
Use the client’s name.
Disclose specifics related to the business.
Disclose confidential information.
Upload law firm contacts onto a social media site.
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.
Employees should never use a client’s name unless written permission has been received.
Employees should never disclose confidential or private business information. Sharing this type of information, even unintentionally, can result in legal action against the employee, the firm, and/or the client.
Outside the workplace, rights to privacy and free speech protect online activity conducted on personal social networks used with personal email addresses. However, what is published on personal online sites should never be attributed to the firm and should not appear to be endorsed by or originated from the firm.
Employees should avoid forums where there is little control over what is known to be confidential information. In the world of social networking, there is often a breach of confidentiality when someone emails an attorney or posts a comment congratulating him/her on representation of a specific client or on a specific case.
Respect the privacy of other employees and of the opinions of others. Before sharing a comment, post, picture, or video about a client or other employee through any type of social media or network, his/her consent is not only a courtesy, it is a requirement.
Get Marketing/ PR departments involved when responding to certain inaccurate, accusatory or negative comments about the firm or any firm clients.
Expertise (Model Rule of Professional Conduct 7.4)
Quick Reference
Do
Allow recommendations.
Review and monitor all recommendations carefully.
Edit or hide recommendations as needed to remove any verbiage that states you are “better”, “the best”, “expert”, “specialized” or “certified”.
Do NOT
Be false or misleading in online credentials.
Use the words “better” or “the best” in credentials or when recommending others.
Use the verbiage “expert”, “specialist” or “certified” to describe experience unless certified by an organization that is accredited by the ABA or the state bar.
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?
Employees should never be false and misleading in online credentials. All employees should maintain complete accuracy in all online bios and ensure no embellishment.
Recommendations should be used carefully. Employees should review all recommendations created for them for any embellishment (i.e. use of the words better or best) expertise, certification or specialization listing. Edit or hide recommendations as needed.
Employees should not include the words “expert”, “certified”, or “specialized” in their credentials unless authorized to do so.
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.
General Communications (Model Rule of Professional Conduct 7 Series)
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
Credit appropriately
Fact check
Spell & grammar check
Correct errors promptly
Be transparent
Follow firm policies
Obey the law
Do NOT
Personally attack, become involved in an online fights or hostile communication.
Solicit or use commercial speech. The content must be informative only. Nothing should propose a commercial transaction
Law firms and law departments should consider the following general policy guidelines when drafting social media policies.
Identify all copyrighted or borrowed material with citations and links. When publishing any material online that includes another’s direct or paraphrased quotes, thoughts, ideas, photos, or videos, always give credit to the original material or author, where applicable.
Ensure material is accurate, truthful, and without factual error prior to posting.
Spell and grammar check everything.
Correct any mistakes promptly.
When participating social media sites in a professional manner, disclose identity and any firm affiliation. Never use a false name, alias, or be anonymous. Many courts have looked poorly on law firms and lawyers using alias names while on social media sites.
Follow all firm policies and procedures regarding online communications. Be respectful and do not make statements that are defamatory; racially, sexually, or otherwise insensitive or offensive; or otherwise improper or likely to conflict with the interests of the firm, its employees, clients, affiliates and others, including competitors.
Follow the site’s terms and conditions of use.
Do not post any information or conduct any online activity that may violate applicable local, state or federal laws or regulations.
Avoid personal attacks, online fights, and hostile communications.
Employees should never solicit or use commercial speech. Employees should not use a site as a way to directly solicit business for the firm. While a blog itself is not subject to the limitation on commercial speech, the content of a blog can be. The content must be informative only, and nothing in the content should propose a commercial transaction or be for the purpose of directly gaining a commercial transaction.
Conclusion
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.
[1] Model Rules of Professional Conduct are professional standards that serve as models of the regulatory law governing the legal profession. However, each state board of professional responsibility has additional or supplemental states rules of ethics. State rules should be considered prior to policy drafting.
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
From the Business of Law Section of the National Law Review -by Tom Ciesielka of TC Public Relations suggests some applications that help streamline Twitter use for busy attorneys – read on:
For all those lawyers out there on Twitter, I’d like to suggest a few programs to simplify your Twitterverse.
TweetBeep
This web-based application enables users to set up a search for any keyword or phrase on Twitter, and receive hourly updates via email when any tweets include that keyword, phrase or hashtag. TweetBeep is an easy tool for tracking talk on Twitter about your firm, website, events or services. By monitoring the conversation about your firm, you can make sure you are managing your reputation and engaging with people who are interested in you – people who can become potential clients. You can also use TweetBeep as an application to measure the impact and engagement level of various cases, or track the reactions to your firm’s announcements or legal victories. It can also be a valuable tool for industry research if you monitor industry-specific terms (such as “intellectual property”) or even a competitor’s name.
Tweet All About It
Sometimes it takes too much time to think about what to tweet (and we all know time is money). Tweet All About It makes it easy as “highlight” and “right click.” This downloadable program allows you tweet pieces of text from websites viewed on Firefox or Internet Explorer by highlighting the text, right clicking and selecting “Tweet All About It.” The text will automatically be tweeted from your Twitter username, and you will have saved time, energy & potentially, money.
Monitter
Anyone, even those without Twitter accounts, can go on the Monitter website and search and track keywords being using on Twitter (somewhat similar to TweetBeep). Users enter words into the search box and instantly see relevant tweets streaming in real-time. They can also send tweets or retweet to their accounts directly from the Monitter interface. You can download the widget for your website to keep track of what people are saying on Twitter about you or your firm. It also can help you identify social media influencers for a certain legal topic or in a specific conversation and it allows you to quickly respond to or join those conversations.
This posting is republished with permission from the Chicago Lawyer Magazine Blog “Around the Watercooler” located at: http://h20cooler.wordpress.com/2010/
Originally posted on the National Law Review and in the LMA Virginia newsletter and contributed by Lauren Hum of Hunton & Williams LLP – some quick tips for SEOing practice descriptions on law firm’s websites:
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 National Law Review suggests you look into attending the International Legal Technology Association (ILTA) Legal Technology Conference – Strategic Unity in Las Vegas August 22-26 Aria Resort http://conference.iltanet.org/
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 DistrictCourt for the NorthernDistrict 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.
