Comments on A simple social media policy for law firms | Real Lawyers Have Blogs

dwesterberg@gmail.com (Dawn Westerberg) — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 11:19:03 -0800

Do you recommend disclaimers for blogs? And if so, how would you word the disclaimer? I agree with simple, brief guidelines. Just be professional.

kevin@lexblog.com (Kevin OKeefe) — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 11:38:16 -0800

I'd advise disclaimers for law blogs. We suggest a standard disclaimer for those on the LexBlog Network, which the lawyer authors may then modify.

The suggested disclaimer reads: "This Blog/Web Site is made available by the lawyer or law firm publisher for educational purposes only as well as to give you general information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice. By using this blog site you understand that there is no attorney client relationship between you and the Blog/Web Site publisher. The Blog/Web Site should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional attorney in your state."

tracy@pluggedinlawyer.com (Tracy Thrower Conyers) — Sat, 12 Dec 2009 14:17:27 -0800

I bumped into a former colleague the other day who told me that he will always remember me as the crazy woman who wanted our firm to pay for our cell phones in 1996. He could not imagine a single reason why he needed to take a work call away from his desk. Now he laughs because his blackberry is attached to his hip 24/7.

McAdams' policy is stunning in its simplicity and reliance on common sense. Any law firm that wants to make it more complicated would be well-advised to (1) not [make it more complicated]; or (2) get a consultant involved that can help them understand new media and the implications of any proposed restrictions.

Excellent and timely post, Kevin!

homan_steve@yahoo.com (homansteve) — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 06:49:04 -0800

I am a veteran journalist, laid off in January after nine years as an editor with the New York Law Journal. I believe one of the problems there was that they monitored our use of the firm's computers. As you said, instead of treating us like cows in a barn, it would have been better for them to have established standards. Even for a legal editor (lower editor) like I was, it was very important that I be able to socialize with the legal community in NYC and state.
If I may, I now ask that you view my new sites and contribute articles, if at all possible:
http://www.linkedin.com/in/veteranjournalist

With Yahoo:
http://dons-review-law-politics-science-philosophy.com

Many thanks!
Steve

marc17@gmail.com (Marc Beharry) — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 13:23:17 -0800

Exposure vs. Reputation Management Problems

I agree Kevin, a short list is necessary because newcomers might not be aware of the pitfalls and doing damage control after the fact is tedious sometimes.

Making the list too long might discourage some and make you look like big brother. And considering the possible benefits I would try to encourage it as much as possible.