Marketing Attorney Blog

As part of my monthly contributions to Web Marketing Today, I'm slowly working my way through the major social media sites. I started with LinkedIn, which has the most relevance to the most attorneys. In future months, I'll tackle Twitter. But this month, I address what is arguably the most powerful website on the planet--Facebook. Search Engines aside (i.e. Google), there is simply no website with more users and higher traffic. And, let's be honest, how can you do serious internet marketing and not be on the biggest site?

So, is Facebook right for you and your law practice? READ ON...

Recently, a California State Bar committee discussed a controversial proposal that would put a red warning label on attorney profiles for those facing disciplinary charges. This would take the concept of a website disclaimer to new heights. Only in California. Actually, I'd say only in Florida. But, indeed, this comes out of the left coast.

The proposal came from State Bar prosecutor Jayne Kim. It prompted an outcry from defense attorneys that felt accusations that had not been fully litigated and proven in court would lead to a serious hit on a law firms' business.

The state delayed voting on the proposal until after a 60-day public comment period. Kim had argued that it was unnecessary, claiming it was simply an extension of a 2011 policy that required consumer alerts on profiles of attorneys formally charged with misappropriation of client funds or improper loan modification activities.

Reporter Saul Sugarman, writing in the San Francisco Daily Journal, said that some committee members wondered why consumer alerts only appear on pages of attorneys while formal charges are pending. In the current system, the alerts go away once lawyers are found culpable of misdeeds, though the details of discipline still appear at the base of their profiles.

Different states have different requirements as to what an attorney can and can't do before, during or after a disciplinary proceeding. The concept of a red warning label simply because an attorney is facing a charge does not seem to be reasonable. Maybe it is because I see what I personally consider unfair outcomes in some of these matters, while more flagrant transgressions often go unaddressed. This is certainly not a blanket concern. The majority of disciplinary counsel come to the proper conclusions. Yet, I still see some serious head scratchers, especially in my area of focus--advertising, marketing and solicitation regulations. Attorneys--defense or otherwise--are right in that a red warning on a website profile is a death knell of sorts. Who is going to use an attorney with a red flag right on their own website bio? Nobody. You'd likely look to minimize your existence online until the matter was resolved. And even then, state bar listings and attorney profile sites on some high profile legal directories might also show the pending discipline.

While the overarching concept of "deceptive and misleading" is my mantra in looking at law firm website marketing from an ethics perspective, I also believe in certain components of "real world" promotion. A discerning consumer will look beyond the glossy, polished profile the attorney writes for him or herself and seek comments from more objective sites. A plumber's website does not say anything about the dozens of BBB files opened up. I guess you go to Angie's List, or in this case, the state bar.
I can't imagine that the plaintiffs' bar will sit back and see this proposal come to fruition. There could be room for a compromise in putting this data into the "disclaimer" component of a website, where a little additional due diligence by the end user is required. Placement on the biography itself would be quite the hardship.

This is a conversation worth watching.

American Bar Association (ABA) incoming President James R. Silkenat has reappointed attorney Micah Buchdahl to a three year term on the Standing Committee of Continuing Legal Education (SCOCLE). The committee is a driving force behind all aspects of lawyer professional development and continuing legal education programming.

Buchdahl is President of Moorestown, New Jersey-based HTMLawyers, a law marketing consultancy, where he works with law firms around the globe on business development initiatives and strategies. He is licensed to practice law in Pennsylvania.

The ABA Center for Professional Development (formerly Center for CLE) is guided by the SCOCLE, working closely with experts from ABA Sections and other entities and from the profession at large in developing programs and products. It serves as the central resource for the ABA and the profession for up-to-the-minute, quality CLE distributed through a variety of convenient formats.

Buchdahl served one year on an appointment by ABA President Laurel Bellows before his reappointment by Silkenat. During this time, he served on the SCOCLE's marketing committee. He also developed programming for the ABA Premier Speaker series, where he will lead an ethics CLE program on attorney ratings & rankings in October 2013. In addition, Buchdahl is Editor in Chief of the ABA's Law Practice Today, the most widely disseminated online resource on law practice management in the legal profession.

A past chair of the Law Practice Management Section of the ABA, Buchdahl developed the ABA Law Firm Marketing Strategies Conference, a standalone business development workshop. He is a longtime faculty member of the Pennsylvania Bar Institute, teaching ethics annually for more than a decade.

The SCOCLE is chaired by Vincent Polley. The Director of the ABA Center for Professional Development is Jill Eckert McCall.

For the May issue of Law Practice Today, focusing on the theme of professional development, I asked my colleague Megan Greenberg, formerly Director of Professional Development at Richards Layton in Delaware to lead the charge as issue editor. Megan's experience as a practicing attorney and PD director, along with her involvement in the Professional Development Consortium (PDC) made her the perfect person to put together leading experts and authors, with timely qualified topics on the ever-increasing role of PD in the law firm.

If you are looking for a compendium of professional development topics and expertise, look no further than this month's LPT. Among the highlights are:

Peta Gordon's very timely piece on "The Other Half." With the popularity of Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg's best-seller Lean In, the author talks about work/life balance following the birth of her second child. Peta is a senior associate in Kaye Scholer's litigation department. Her story will resonate with many female attorneys working to balance a demanding professional life with raising a family.

Nick Gaffney's Roundtable series takes on Law Firm Associate Perspectives on Professional Development, with contributions from Chandana Ravindranath, an Associate at DLA Piper in New York, Henry Warnock, with Ford Harrison in Atlanta, and Tracy Weiss, an associate at Greenberg Traurig in Phoenix.

Why are associate attrition rates so high? Author Rachel Silverman asks and answers the question in "Associate Engagement Is No Laughing Matter." A key reason is a lack of genuine engagement in the most important drivers of professional satisfaction. A savvy associate engagement strategy will increase your associates' motivation and productivity--and your bottom line.

Of course, I'm going to highlight my own contribution. In "Ethics Imperative to Business Development Learning," I address the way PD and marketing programs intersection when it comes to ethics compliance. From websites and social media, ratings and rankings, the ethical implications of marketing activities are varied and complex. Ensure your professional development program isn't forgetting the ethics component of marketing. It is highly embarrassing to law firm management than the letter from the state disciplinary counsel citing a firm for violating the RPC in marketing, advertising or solicitation.

To read the May issue, CLICK HERE.

After more than five years of deliberation and challenges such as Harrell v. Florida Bar, the Supreme Court of Florida's new advertising rules take effect today, May 1, 2013. While Florida remains a "sticky state" when it comes to advertising ethics rules, the state does a great job of providing guidance for compliance on the state bar website.

Among the interesting areas to note is the loosening of restrictions as it relates to television, print and billboards, while there are stricter standards for websites and online marketing. The growth of directories, referrals services, social media and use of video (often through online use) over the last few years necessitated a tweaking and revisiting of some ethical obligations.

Why do I care so much about Florida when it comes to examining the RPC and ethics opinions for lawyers in that state? First, many other states follow Florida's lead, not only in regard to guidelines and rules, but in terms of compliance and proactive examination. Second, many of my large law firm clients (especially in the northeastern United States) have a Florida office location--meaning the rules significantly impact marketing efforts. Finally, many law firms find that retiring attorneys, retiring clients and matters (sometimes tied to retiring too) find their way south to the warmer weather--the impact of Florida is felt by many law firms, thus the need to comply and be aware of the issues is necessary.

Earlier this month, the Ohio Supreme Court's ethics board ruled on the issue of lawyers soliciting clients by text message. Before you get all excited about sending out that next text to a prospective client, you'd better familiarize with the part of the opinion that mentions...so long as the advertising rules of the state are followed.

I've long discussed the ethics issues involved in a lawyer using text messaging as a communications tool with clients and prospective clients. There are plenty of lawyer ads and billboards that invite you to text. The area I had never put a lot of thought into was the proactive text--from the lawyer to the potential client offering up legal services. Even someone like me that is engaged in developing marketing strategies for law firms every day had not really embraced the initial touch of a text as a method of advertising communication.

Just as lawyers cull various public records to send direct mail to prospective clients--for criminal defense, tax issues, bankruptcy, personal injury--many are now taking a no-mail-barred approach and going right to the cellphone. It is quicker and cheaper, and likely as effective as the "cold call" letter. In many marketing efforts, we are quickly finding out that the mobile device is the most effective means of communication--through mobile sites, apps, tablets, etc. Why wait for snail mail when you can reach a person right now, wherever they may be? The cell phone is often available right on those accident reports and other potential sources of new business.

The Ohio opinion (2013-2, April 5, 2013) starts by addressing that is fits into both the "electronic" and "written" communication categories. It also discusses the difference between "real time" (which is a no-no) and something more akin to an e-mail (OK). However, while coming to the conclusion that texting as an advertising tool is permissible, the related compliance issues make it a non-starter for most that might be interested in trying it out. Among the items that merit consideration and concern are:

You must let the recipient know how you became aware of their situation.

The term "ADVERTISING MATERIAL" or "ADVERTISEMENT ONLY" must appear in the body of the text.

You must follow the 30-day solicitation rule of the state. Ohio's is much looser than many, but requires specific disclaimer language--which can't simply be delivered via a website hyperlink.

You must ensure that the recipient is not charged for the text.

You must follow applicable telemarketing laws (including the do not call registry).

I applaud Ohio for addressing the texting issue in rather quick fashion. It seems like many states have been slow to hit some heavily used areas of technology marketing, including blogs, social media and referral services. For some reason, many have been quick to address the "daily deal" sites (such as Groupons). However, as is often the case in the area of law marketing ethics, these opinions become the framework for many other states. If you are considering the use of texting or are already doing so, this opinion provides a solid framing of the issues and concerns.

When creating the "Internet Marketing Attorney" moniker in 1997, I would scour the web for the most innovative law firm websites, eventually rating and ranking them in five categories--design, content, usability, interactivity and intangibles. If you were listed among the 250 largest U.S. law firms, you were then ranked accordingly. Many small and midsize firms from around the world submitted themselves for consideration as well, and while I did not review all of them, I also had the annual Nifty Fifty list of innovative legal website components. But times changed and just like technology, I had to adapt.

There were three key factors that led me to stop presenting the IMAs--as they are known throughout the legal industry. First, the large law firm sites become homogenized. There were so few substantive differences to the sites that it made finding those differentiators quite difficult. I would write the same notes and comments over and over again. Second, my "for-profit" business (HTMLawyers, my law marketing consultancy) did not provide enough free time to properly conduct these evaluations. Because I never solicited those law firms I reviewed, it was a great branding tool but not necessarily a revenue generator. My time was always "sold out", but it was tough to equate new business with the time needed for the IMAs. Finally, any free time or "down time" is now owned by my children--who do not find law firm websites all that fascinating. Luckily, my monthly contributions to Web Marketing Today allow me to continually monitor and teach best practices for law firm internet marketing.

Which is a long-winded way of introducing this month's WMT column, Law Firm Websites: A Developer's Review, where in essence I turn the tables slightly by asking the web site developers to tell me what site they like best and why (obviously, their own handiwork). I invited some of the more prominent names in law firm website development to participate--just give me a site and what makes it special. The end result is a handy tutorial for any law firm looking to identify key components for their next website.

The cited sites offer a nice mix of law firm geography and size. Included in this column are websites developed for McElroy, Deutsch, Mulvaney & Carpenter, Freeborn & Peters, Sideman & Bancroft, Nixon Peabody, and Jeffer Mangels.

Thanks to Inherent, Saturno Design, Duo Consulting, Bothwell Marketing and Justia for taking part. Each provided me with a website, some background and key features. In my 17 years of working on law firm website projects, I've had the opportunity to work with hundreds of developers throughout the world. In many cases, I've reviewed their RFP responses to law firms in helping select the right provider. In others, dozens of law firm website developers keep me informed of their newer launches and products--helping me pass that information along to my IMA and WMT readership. This month's column is a map of the newer online features that merit consideration in building or upgrading a law firm website.

For more than a decade, I've provided the Pennsylvania Bar Institute with an annual ethics program on a law marketing or advertising topic. Over the years I've focused on a different theme each year--starting with Internet marketing ethics in the late 90s to years where I've focused on Supreme Court cases, social media, rankings & ratings--whatever was new and "hot." This year, I simply pick 13 current areas that have recently been addressed or still come into play.

This year's program will likely change from the first presentation (April) to the second and third compliance period presentations in August and December. However, there are plenty areas of interest to go around. Included in this year's program is discussion of trade names, websites, blogs, social media, Groupons, specialization, ratings & rankings, direct mail, mobile marketing, video and whatever new ethics opinion comes across my desk this week.

In April, I will present live for PBI in Pittsburgh on April 24 and home in Philadelphia on April 26. Check the PBI website for video replays and additional live dates later in the year.

For lawyers, there is so much more to LinkedIn than creating a profile, getting some connections and joining a few groups. The real value of participation is from the other products and services they offer. In this month's Web Marketing Today column, I try to address some of the components that go "beyond the basics."

Personally, I probably don't use LinkedIn the same way as many other marketing professionals or attorneys. I find the tool extremely valuable--but more as a super-powered directory of contacts for lead generation, competitive intelligence and a better source of data about people and companies. I find it very useful when following up with someone, learning more about a business card picked up at a networking function or refining a list of prospective clients. Others, however, spend hours on end building a network and doing a slightly more sophisticated method of cold calling.

As noted in the column, there is no disputing the power of LinkedIn. It is the second search result when looking myself up on Google--behind only my own website. With 200 million-plus users, there is a pretty good chance that the professional I'm looking for is in the network. He or she may have a skeletal profile and three contacts--but they are there nonetheless.

Like many friends and colleagues, I'm on Facebook multiple times each day. But I'm there to show you what my kids are up to, talk Phillies, Eagles, or Temple Owls basketball. My wife--a master at the "check in"--makes it easier for me to get served with a subpoena, since you know what restaurant to find me in on Saturday night. While I do mix personal and professional contacts, it is clearly a social environment. Depending on your practice area, it might be fertile ground for marketing. And with recent changes in design, it is becoming a more viable advertising option for law practices as well. But it is not for everyone.

Twitter, the third major player in today's social media circles, skews a little younger. The audience is huge, and loyal followers are avid. But, once again, the interest in participating among law firms is not always there. Somebody has to be tweeting all the time, and that does not work everywhere.

You may or may not choose to engage in Facebook or Twitter, but any business professional should maintain a level of activity on LinkedIn.

On February 28th, the Virginia Supreme Court held that a disclaimer was required under the state's advertising rules when posting results on a website. This is the latest outcome in the seemingly never-ending battle between Horace Hunter and the Virginia State Bar. This has been a widely watched case among ethics attorneys like myself that follow the bouncing ball of state bar advertising restrictions and first amendment scholars looking at the "free speech" argument. Is the next stop the U.S. Supreme Court?

Last April (2012), I was part of an ABA CLE panel that discussed "Is Your Legal Blog Compliant? Ethical considerations in the wake of Hunter v. Virginia State Bar." The panel included Mr. Hunter, myself, employment law blogger Molly DiBianca and noted Virginia ethics attorney Tom Spahn. We discussed and debated the many issues in the case. It is effectively a case of first impression in the law blogosphere. That was prior to the case heading up the ladder to the state supreme court. Read more about the program in Your ABA's e-news--Blogs can be legal minefields.

Blogs have been around since the late 1990s, yet this cyberspace battle in Virginia is the first real challenge by a state bar to the often cloudy areas of interpretation. Is a blog advertising, marketing, editorial, personal, or business? Where does the First Amendment end and the Model Rules of Professional Conduct begin? Should a state bar look at a blog as marketing or something else?

I've found that heavy bloggers and those that sell blogs to law firms are often quite vocal in the opinion that the blog is somehow "media" and exempt from rules under "marketing." As a former journalist, I've always been disturbed by the concept that someone with a blog is suddenly a "reporter." Clearly, there are blogs that have become popular enough in the mainstream that they become influencers and sometimes garner "media" status for credentialing and access. I can't tell you how many times I've been asked to credential bloggers for various conferences. Usually they are just too cheap to register. And in most cases, I've never heard of them. There are blogs that are clearly online media. But they are usually a standalone entity and not promotional in the sense that the goal is anything more than traffic generation. The goal of most lawyer blogs is to generate business as lawyers--whether it is direct or in many cases, helping with search engine optimization, increasing media inquiries or branding visibility. Any way you slice it, we are not doing it as a personal "dear diary."

The ethics attorney part of me clearly believes that a law firm or lawyer blog is advertising, marketing or a communication that falls under the respective RPC. It is simply ridiculous to differentiate between a law firm website and a law firm blog (with, of course, exceptions). When doing an ethics compliance review of a blog, I look at numerous factors--including disclaimers, links to the main site, bar states of contributors and various other criteria in making sure a law firm blog is compliant--based on advertising and solicitation rules, not based on the concept that the attorney is an objective journalist making a comment.

Of course, if you are reading this, you realize that this is a blog! I do it for all the aforementioned reasons. But if you think the underlying goal is anything less than business development...please. We blog to get attention--for our practice, for our business. Not that there is anything wrong with that. We give advice, opinions and provide news for our niche targets.

It will be interesting if Hunter gets to the U.S. Supreme Court. Because a ruling there would likely elevate or dilute the level of restriction and requirements accompanying the thousands of law firm blogs out there. A good blog offers expert opinion--but it is marketing. This is not The New York Times.

This month marks the first of our two annual "Young Lawyers Survival Guide" issues of Law Practice Today, developed in coordination with the ABA's Young Lawyers Division. Thanks to issue editor Elizabeth Henslee for putting together an outstanding collection of articles designed with the young lawyer audience in mind--although almost all of the content is relevant to attorneys of all ages.

New to LPT this month are two rotating bimonthly features, including Professional Development (now rotating with Career Paths) and Diversity & Inclusion (rotating with Women Rainmakers). This month, Jennifer Bluestein writes about time management. Jen is the Director of Professional Development at Greenberg Traurig. She also serves as Chair of the Professional Development Consortium (PDC). LPT is working with the PDC to produce timely articles on PD. We also welcome a contribution from Aracely Munoz Petrich on watching the Supreme Court with apprehension. Aracely is the vice chair of the Diversity & Inclusion Committee of the ABA Law Practice Management Section. Professional development and diversity are becoming more and more significant in the day-to-day operations of a law firm. LPT's editorial board recognizes that there is a demand and interest in more features relating to those important law practice management topics.

A renowned panel of experts from the academic world and law firm world participate in a roundtable discussion, moderated by Nicholas Gaffney of Infinite PR, on what law firms expect from new lawyers. Gaffney's roundtable series appears a few times each year, and provides multiple perspectives on our monthly issue themes.

To read the March issue, click here.

Thanks,

Micah Buchdahl
Editor in Chief
Law Practice Today

My marketing column in the March/April issue of Law Practice focuses on the many ways that charitable involvement--be it time or money--can also pay significant dividends for a law firm's marketing efforts. Too often it is not fully embraced (or simply ignored) as a tie-in to everything from image branding to professional development.

If you have a law firm marketer, is s/he aware of and involved in charitable contributions? Is this discussed by the marketing partner and marketing committee? There are so many ancillary benefits that come from "doing good" that unwittingly get overlooked. Is there an internal list that shows charitable involvement--financial contributions, pro bono, board appointments, events, relevancy to clients? "Giving back" is a hallmark of law firm involvement in a community. Being recognized for those efforts is far greater "branding" than a promotional advertisement or marketing campaign. Read the article to see if your law practice is making the most of your philanthropic endeavors.

In this month's Web Marketing Today column, I discuss the uses and value of video as an Internet marketing tool for attorneys. Video provides both enhanced web content as well as improved search engine optimization results.

Among the things that have changed in video production over the last five years or so is the importance of making sure that the quality is there. Lawyers should not look like they are facetiming each other on an iPad. That is left for my kids harassing relatives with video chat. Getting seasoned professionals to produce, tape and edit is critical.

My column discusses the ABA Golden Gavel Video Awards, created by Infinite PR's Nicholas Gaffney. I also talk about web video marketing tools such as those developed by TheLaw.tv and an example of law firms moving often-stilted webinars to a polished video product. The use of video impacts every type of law practice. Brown Rudnick's Charitable Foundation uses video to enhance the site for their Center for the Public Interest.

Of course, it would not be my take on video without pointing to my own humorous production from a few years back. If everyone loves it, then it is not really edgy or out-of-the-box. From Delaware corporate law to Carly Rae Jepsen, video has numerous uses in the law marketing toolbox. Some work better than others.

It is rare that I make a trip to Chicago or Toronto without spending an evening at Second City. There is nothing more entertaining (to me) than great improvisational comedy. Growing up, I was a Second City TV groupie of sorts, now possessing the entire DVD collection of SCTV. I love the creativity, thinking on your feet and ability to laugh at oneself (and others). So it was easy to talk about Drexel University Law School's "Improv for Lawyers" class in an article written this week by Associated Press reporter Kathy Matheson.

Matheson was writing about the uniqueness of such a law school elective, taught by actress/comedian Sharon Geller, who has also provided improv training as a CLE to lawyers in various settings. While this all coincidentally took place in my home base of Philadelphia, it was my role in the American Bar Association--as a past chair of the Law Practice Management Section and a current member of the ABA's Standing Committee on CLE that led her to ask about my experience and views on the subject. I was asked about the uniqueness of the program and the value to a new or seasoned attorney.

In many law firm retreats where I've participated in some manner--either in organization, as a speaker, or in conjunction with a business development project--an improv session taught by one of many skilled troupes in the United States (including Second City traveling casts) is used to develop skills including team building, public speaking, "thinking on your feet" and training for improved client and prospective client interactions. Improv has also been used by a number of law firms I work with for associate and partner professional development training programs in-house. Whether or not they qualify as "substantive legal training" as a CLE is a state-by-state matter--but that is a subject for another post. Whether or not it is CLE accredited, the program provides a useful training ground that incorporates numerous elements of law practice.

The Drexel class is a huge hit. The school has always been known for providing some out-of-the-box "real world" training. In a short time, the law school has done a nice job carving out space and a good reputation in an excellent Philadelphia area law school market (led, of course, by my undergrad and law school alma mater Temple).

In the AP article, Matheson quotes a former course participant and present Ballard Spahr associate about being prepared for responding to difficult things or difficult people. Yes, those are not wasted skills for a new attorney to possess. And at a time where law firms are becoming increasingly more focused on PD and business development, an ability to be creative, think outside the box and challenge conventions is not a bad thing to include in the workplace curriculum. Many law firms should take note of the interest that a course such as this one has generated. It takes some guts and personality to succeed on the improv stage. There is no question that the skill set translates to the practice of law.

Recent rulings and advisories by the National Labor Relations Board regarding social media policies in the workplace impact law firms in a variety of ways. Today's New York Times article by Steven Greenhouse reviews how the NLRB is basically telling employers to scale back limitations as it relates to many social media policies that might be seen as illegal blanket restrictions.

Can you really stop Facebook and Twitter from happening in today's workplace? Nope.

The NLRB says workers have a right to discuss work conditions freely and without fear of retribution, whether you are in the employee cafeteria or on Facebook. Although Facebook might have better food options (I said that. It is not in the article).

The bottom line--many companies are rewriting social media rules. If you want to read about social media in the workplace from an employment law perspective, you are better off going to Molly DiBianca on The Delaware Employment Law Blog. I'm here to discuss the potential impact on the law firm from an ethics compliance and business development perspective.

Having taught social media courses at many law firms, written a few of the policies myself, and conducted ethics compliance reviews for a number of the AMLAW 200, I can tell you that some of the policies--both written, unwritten and suggested--are somewhat out of whack with recent developments. I often remind some firms that they might "suggest" or "guide" employees (lawyers and staff alike), but some of the policies I've seen have been overbroad and overreaching. The Rules of Professional Conduct take care of many of the ethics issues for the lawyers. However, there are plenty of gray areas as they relate to LinkedIn profiles, Facebook posts and tweets.

Be sure your law firm's approach to social media is appropriate. Because it is one thing to read about a corporation coming out on the short end of these rulings; it is another for a client to see you listed as one of the offending parties.