Header graphic for print
Real Lawyers Have Blogs On the topic of the law, firm marketing, social media, & baseball

Divide grows between lawyers with and without digital influence

Minneapolis based Web marketing and PR strategist, Adam Singer, has an excellent blog post this morning about the growing divide between those with digital influence and those without.

While the business digital divide – at least in the marketing and media industries – feels to be closing, there’s another rift less discussed: a divide between those with digital influence/share of voice and those without. And it’s a rift that grows wider daily.

Many businesses and individuals who embraced content marketing years ago are seeing strong returns and are far ahead of those starting today.

Singer noted 10 points why this is. All of them apply to law firms. Here’s my 8 with a law firm slant (heavily leveraging Singer’s copy).

  1. The web rewards a long term commitment. We’re weary of law firms and legal professionals not only new to us, but new to a network. Law firms starting to create an effective digital channel (not a website) are starting from scratch in creating a digital reputation and interacting through social technologies. Try to force the issue and it will only set you back in the eyes of the influential, a law firm’s most needed ally in creating influence.
  2. More content = more potential entry points, more links. Law firms who comprehend the value of building out their content over time continue to accumulate more digital influence and steadily gain greater share of voice.  More content = more hooks in the water for search, more potential pages for users to share and helps establish a brand as referential. It’s not about quantity or quality alone – you need both.
  3. Those who have been at it awhile have refined their digital processes. This takes time. Law firms, generally, do not have legal marketers who are social media savvy. Newcomers unknowingly make mistakes which embarrass the law firm in the eyes of savvy clients and others with digital influence.
  4. Sophisticated people and companies have already built a tribe. Those with comprehension of what a digital society enables have been building organic, opt-in subscribers base for years. Many are reaching tipping points where those subscribers are producing strong ROI for that company or person. We’re not talking law firm email newsletter and alert subscribers, but people who cite you and your content – who in effect are doing your marketing for you.
  5. Understanding of how pull PR works. While some law firms continue to engage in the cat-and-mouse game of media pitching, a few smart marketers and even media organizations are embracing a pull strategy. Law firms are failing on both push and pull strategies. Very few law firms have a clue how to pitch a blogger. And rather than blog as a way to enter an ongoing conversation as a thought leader in a niche, law firms wrongly strive to make their blogs the center of attention.
  6. Attraction of web-literate team members. Law firms who cling to the past are not going to attract the same talent as those pushing boundaries. Web-savvy communication professionals don’t want to work with handcuffs on and with people who don’t understand social media. The 45% of law firms blocking the use of social media and social networking mediums like Twitter and Facebook are going to attract no one who knows anything here.
  7. Legal marketers who take a ‘head in the sand’ approach to digital hold law firms back. Social media is not new, and if you think it is you’re already devastatingly far behind in digital influence. Ignore the social web at your own peril – law firms who take a wait and see approach yield a lot of ground to agile competitors. Marketers who treat the web as an experiment thrive.
  8. Others have already grabbed search engine results pages/domains/social sites. Law firms behind here may have missed the chance at having a community in a niche area of law or industry. Users may have already decided how certain law firms should be perceived digitally before a law firm is able to carve out a reputation for themselves. Singer is spot on as to how this applies to professionals like lawyers: how many of you don’t own your name on key channels or appear on page one of searches for more than just your website bio?

Lawyers and law firms are traditionally laggards when it comes to things innovative. But in my travels and talking with hundreds of lawyer and firms, how to use social media to network through the Internet is one hot topic. Waiting is only going to increase the digital divide between you and your competitors.

Consider adding Singer’s blog, The Future Buzz, to your RSS feeds. Good stuff.

  • http://www.practicehacker.com practicehacker

    Kevin
    First congratulations on your Legal Rebel status with the ABA. You earned it so go on you.
    As for your post, I can’t take Mr. Singer’s piece too seriously. It is well written, the points are valid; but if replace ‘social media’ with website and it could have been written 10 years ago. If you substitute ‘blogs ‘for social media then it could have been written 5 years ago. I’ve heard it before.
    Are you surprised lawyers don’t get social media? I’m not. The real question is and has always been whether social media (or blogs, or websites) are a necessary part of a practice or just the flavor of the month? The way I see it, the only way for SM to prove itself is to deliver or be gone, just like the yellow pages.
    Tell me I’m wrong. Seriously. Tell me I’m wrong.

  • http://lifeatthebar.com Julie A. Fleming

    Practice Hacker: While I agree with you that this is all stuff we’ve heard before, and it could have been repeated word for word years ago with website or blogs instead of social media, that doesn’t make it less true. Haven’t the last ten years shown that it is necessary to have a website and the last five years shown how essential it is to have a blog? That only strengthens his point that social media is the new essential tool.

  • http://thefuturebuzz.com Adam Singer

    @practicehacker – exactly, that’s why there is a divide in influence. Many have been practicing this stuff for years while many have not. It wasn’t supposed to be new information, that wasn’t the thrust of the article.