I'd like to know more about this part of your article:

"Unfortunately for our profession, this type of lawyer marketing is just feeding the public's perception of lawyers as the least trust worthy of any profession. That's a shame as it means injury victims and their family members are less likely to seek help from a good plaintiff's trial lawyer - they don't trust us."

A major part of my mission is to change the way the American public thinks about lawyers and I'm not seeing how the page you referenced breeds distrust.

I believe the intention with this page is to open dialogue and educate the public. What do you see it as?

Let's give some constructive feedback to help Chris and Mischelle Davis, who I know have their heart in the right place.

How can we help them?

Alexis

I could be wrong, but I don't know if this lawyer cares whether he gets his next client off an ad on a urinal wall or a Facebook page. There's nothing that leads me to believe the lawyer is seeking to engage people in a positive way through social media.

Pictures of wrecked cars and truly meaningless text about a teen, who it appears he does not know, being flown to Harborview Medical Center (our lead trauma center). Where do you see the effort to educate and dialogue?

I see this as if I get my name on a billboard, any where/any place, maybe you'll look at the references to dollars on my website.

What you are seeing is just a symptom of the bigger issue, the Dan Kennedy-ization of the legal profession. There are groups out there that promote link exchanges between members, their members review each others "books," they become fans of each others Facebook pages and LinkedIn groups, and they rate each other on review sites... among many other things. An argument can be made about the validity of some of these initiatives, and I'm not specifically commenting on the content of the page that is the focus of your post. But, it's being marketed using a technique I call reciprocity without merit (I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine), which is a hallmark of these groups. And unfortunately, I think we're only seeing the tip of the iceberg.

Your humble opinion is a limited one. Don't confuse the platform with this example of it being poorly used.

Amazing that you would suggest using Facebook lacks dignity but then say: go with Twitter.
What exactly gives one more "dignity" than the other?

These are tremendous communications tools - good for retail, good for service professionals.

Go where the people gather - that's where you'll find your audience. Facebook is exploding with growth AND happens to be the largest platform already.
There are a ton of bloggers whose blogging is lame. Says nothing about the platform.

Yes, facebook (twitter and friendfeed) allows someone to instantaneously represent themselves (and our profession) poorly to the entire world. It also allows lawyers to keep in touch with old contacts and network with one another. It allows us to positively present ourselves as well. One amazing opportunity for lawyers is the dissemination of information. You used to need a law library, then a Westlaw (Lexis) account; now you can find a wealth of knowledge online (often produced by attorneys).

I think the days of social media being cheesy or lacking dignity are largely behind us but perhaps there's still a little ways to go.

The public has a far better idea of how social media like Facebook is used than many lawyers. When lawyers show they are willing to use high profile mediiums without knowing how, lawyers run the risk that people will wonder how prudent they are in handling other matters - such as someone's legal work.

No one is sitting on the sidelines here. The easy thing to do would be for me to say nothing and let lawyers go on making foolish use of social media like facebook. However, I care enough about lawyers and our profession to call a spade a spade.