Personal injury law blog crap rolls on
I see more and more crap coming from plaintiff's personal injury lawyers who are trying their hand at blogs.
The latest comes from Dallas Attorney Shezad Malik who posts 'Ambulance And Car Accident in Leonard, North of Dallas.' I wonder how much thought went into typing 'A 59 year old woman, and her twin sons, both 29 were killed,' and that 'Leonard is about 50 miles north of Dallas.'
Of course the longest paragraph in the post:
If you or a family member has been injured because of the fault of someone else; by negligence, personal injury, slip and fall, car accident, medical malpractice, trucking accident, drunk driving, bad product, toxic injury etc then please contact the Dallas Texas Personal Injury Attorney Dr. Shezad Malik. For a no obligation, free case analysis, please call 817-255-4001 or Contact Me Online.
Blogs like this are being used to game Google and for no other reason at all. The lawyer is regularly updating his blog with keywords related to his locale and injury matters hoping that his blog will rise to the top of the search engines for related terms. And of course throw in a few links in target text like 'personal injury' linking to your website for added SEO effect.
To the majority of bloggers, the media, and sane people, the lawyer looks like an idiot at best. To me, he's an embarrassment to our profession.
I have nothing against plaintiff's trial lawyers. I was a plaintiff's personal injury lawyer for 17 years. During that time I was a board member of my state's trial lawyers association and a sustaining member of the Association of Trial Lawyers of America. We're the guys in the white hats championing the causes of American consumers.
With blogs being the great equalizer for small firm lawyers against those firms with deep pockets for marketing, it's a terrible shame to see more and more of the above.
Lawyers as servants of American consumers ought to call lawyers out on this crap. Same for concerned consumers and business people. Send them an email asking them to stop. Blog about it. Tweet about it.
There's much more to be gained from peer and public pressure than from ill informed bar regulators clamping down on tasteless lawyer marketing.
And therein lies the danger of SEO. Anyone reading a heavily optimized page will think that the author was a moron. The section you quoted is a great example.
How about SEO firms who link their attorney client's web page to their other client's web pages. I know an attorney whose web page appears on Hollywood Gossip sites in a blog roll of sorts. I doubt any human interested in the law firm ever sees it, but the spiders do. Sleazy stuff though.
And don't get me started on the attorneys who claim to be the "best" at a particular type of case, when there is no extrinsic evidence that they have even handled ONE of those types of cases.
I'm seeing this kind of unimaginative use of the internet by law firms not just on blogs but also on Twitter.
Check out this law firms twitter account as one such example:
http://twitter.com/VancouverLawyer
Blogs and other social media are about two way communication. About conversation and providing benefit for your readers, not shouting out "HIRE ME".
Its a shame that personal injury law firms engage in some of the worst lawyer marketing practices when the profession serves so many people so well.
Nothing better serves the tort reform platform than being able to point out tasteless lawyer marketing to consumers. We can do better than this guys!
Before I get going with my comment, let me say, I despise sleaze.
Okay, with that out of the way, is the problem with this Mensa member that he's using social media to say "hire me," or is the problem that he's using social media to say "HIRE ME, HIRE ME, HIRE ME."
See, I don't think I have an objection to using the Internets, blogs, websites, posting and SEO wisdom to try and get clients. That is, getting potential clients using the web to find some help to arrive on my doorstep. But, when they arrive, I want them to think I'm a decent guy, a competent practitioner and worth their further inquiry.
The fool linked above does none of those things, but I wonder whether people think that the web should be the hippie-love-in of no marketing or business development for lawyers.
Thoughts?
I've seen loads of PI bloggers with this type of crap and much worse. I think it's darn close to online solicitation. And it's shameful.
Kevin, don't sugarcoat it. Tell us what you really think.
Well, there are 4 issues going on here:
1) codes of ethics
2) personal ethics
3) value of blawg and other educational marketing
4) SEO.
1) The above example (and the many, many others) are the on-line version of "ambulance chasing," which has given the PI atty a bad brand to begin with. Hence, there are codes of ethics on how to use the web -- and they will be improved (that is, more specific - not just more words, hopefully) as years go on.
2) Of course, like other regulations and laws (like speeding), there is only so much policing to be done. It's comes down to personal responsibility, values, ethics, and pride. Thus, the PI/trial world been able to overcome much public derision (and good jokes).
3) As blawgging, podcasting, video, e-book marketing grows more mainstream (in the legal community), more attorneys (and para staff) will realize that the real value isn't just mere "display advertising," but rather credibility and remark-ability as they share insight, thought, perspective (though not advice).
4) SEO: keyword-dropping, like name-dropping, will be a perennial if not pretentious issue. SEO algorithms have grown more sophisticated and we should always blog with it in mind. It isn't WRONG; heck, as an intelligent form of marketing, blawging should be SEO conscious: Though our SEO-friendly posts & comments should be checked with the above 3 principles.
Great post to reveal a great "don't" in blawgging...
~ Vikram Rajan
PracticeMarketingAdvisors.com
That last paragraph, the "hire me" one, is at the bottom of all his posts. I can understand making that a fixture at the bottom of each post, but it would make more sense to separate it from the actual post.
I don't think the guy puts much effort into the blog; you give him too much credit.
Kevin, would allow a lexblogger to use a blog in the same manner as this guy? Do services like yours (specifically, those run by lawyers) have an obligation to intervene or police on behalf of the profession? I'm inclined to let people do what they want, but I'm sure there are limits somewhere.
Just curious.
Good question David, I feel an obligation to point out such failures to our clients. My guess is that we have some clients going up to the edge and it will be our responsibility to point out better blogging practices when we discover them.
It's really in the best interests of the lawyer who is blogging. They'll do a better job enhancing their reputation and getting business blogging in a more professional way.
I have been trying to expand my reading list lately, and I have seen a ton of similar blogs. I don't like them either. I am curious what the client thinks of their fact situation being used in a quasi-press release, and does this type of advertising work. If I were a potential client, I don't think I would be impressed by a blog that didn't contribute something.
I think Victor Medina makes a good point. Where is the line? I blog because I enjoy it, but at least part of my motivation is that they want potential clients to find my blog. If I ran my own firm I would probably consider occasionally using my blog for press releases (hopefully more tasteful than the one above).
Is the issue ethics or quality? The Texas PI Blog discussed above has daily posts, which is commendable. Other than that, there are no external links or references, and every single post is a blatant advertisement, which is less-than desirable. But is it fair to be roasting this guy?