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

Ghostblogging will be the death of social media in the law

We’re just scratching the surface of what social media can do for lawyers and law firms. But rather than learn how to harness this powerful relationship building tool, one with its roots in traditional client development, I’m finding some lawyers and law firms would rather pay to have someone else participate in social media for them.

It’s called ghostblogging. Having someone you pay, whether they work at your firm or elsewhere, blog on your behalf. You also pay the ghosts to post on your behalf on Twitter, Facebook, and where have you.

Mitch Joel cites an article in February’s Entrepreneur Magazine as an example of this burgeoning industry of ghostblogging.

As a young industry, ghostblogging has no best practices or trade organization. Some practitioners write blogs of a paragraph or two, others 250 to 300 words, but rarely longer. This is the Internet, don’t forget. Attn spans r short. Writers charge by the blog or tweet and juggle half-a-dozen clients or more. Some ghostbloggers prefer the loftier title ‘social media consultant.’ The best are careful to plant key search-engine words into their posts, which will raise a company’s web-search ranking.

Yesterday I saw a press release from a law firm SEO (search engine optimization) company labeled something like ‘Blogging 1-2-3.’ The implication being that blogging is all about high search engine rankings and with the advertisers help in identifying and blogging the right words, your law firm will soon rise to the the top of the search engines.

Fortunately there are those like communications specialist Shel Holtz, quoted in the Entrepreneur Magazine article, who see the utter failure of ghostblogging.

Ghostblogging is a horrible thing. I’m a huge fan of transparency. My advice to executives is: If you don’t take the time to write yourself, find another channel of communication.

Joel addresses the response I’ve heard from some law firms. ‘We’ve always had other lawyers and staff people write for leading lawyers in the firm. Ghostwriting, ghostblogging, it’s all one in the same.’

I’m being naive (I know), people will say, ‘someone writes the speech for the President’ or ‘if people like it and connect to the content, who cares who writes it?’ I dunno, I do. People have lost faith in marketing (just like they have lost faith in those who serve the public office and celebrities). We allow things that shouldn’t be… to be. Saying that ghostwriters have been around for years doesn’t make it right or authentic. Times have changed, and these platforms are (or should be) celebrated for the human and real side. Can you imagine that some Blogs, Twitter and Facebook feeds that you follow are not the real person, but the musings of someone else who simply interviewed the person you thought that you were following? Sure, there’s a place for ghostwriters, but maybe Social Media isn’t one of them?

Maybe there’s a place for ghostwriters at law firms. Associates and staff people can write articles, email newsletters, and alerts. Ghostwriters may even write chapters in books for a rainmaking partner.

But the very essence of social media precludes ghostwriting. Social media is not about producing content. Social media is about engaging others so as to build and nurture meaningful relationships. Engagement that requires listening to your audience and offering value to the conversation.

Sure, it’s going to take a little time and practice for you as a lawyer to learn the art of social media. That’s okay. You’ve taken the time to learn the skills critical to your success before. Do it again here. It’s required.

  • http://www.AnAppealtoReason.com Donna

    While I know of attorneys who have resorted to ghostblogging, I won’t be doing that on my blog. I am sure many of these attorneys started out writing their own blogs but the task became overwhelming, especially if the blog brought in new clients. Perhaps if the blog is merely reporting on current cases or events, one might understand ghostblogging but if the blog is meant to convey the writer’s personality or advice, then I would always want the words to be my own. That is especially true if readers comment on the blog. Some of these bloggers may have posted on a frequent basis and are afraid of losing SEO by not posting every day. But perhaps the solution is to blog less and keep it personal.

  • http://kevin.lexblog.com Kevin OKeefe

    You raise a good point Donna about law blogs that do nothing but provide updates on case, statuatory, or regulatorly law.
    Law firms doing that are providing a service by sharing the summaries they prepare. They’re also making the information more freely accessible than in an email alert in that the content is immediately indexed on Google and picked up on Google Blog Search by people following topics referenced.
    In those cases may the content is ‘author neutral.’

  • http://www.ComplianceBuilding.com Doug Cornelius

    Kevin -
    I think it’s important to draw a distinction between the two types of ghost-writing you mention. There is internal ghost-writing where a junior person is doing the bulk of the work but not getting the credit. We’ve seen this forever, whether it is writing briefs, drafting contracts or producing articles. The key is that the law firm still has the internal expertise on that topic.
    The second type, external ghost-writing, is a bigger problem. When you are hiring an external person to create content, that content and that knowledge is now outside the firm.
    Now you are potentially being deceptive. You are publishing an article that implies you know something about a topic. Since you hired a third-party, you may not know anything about the topic except how much it cost to buy the article. Since its external, rather than internal, you can’t call the junior person into your office to help out.
    I take issue with Donna’s comment that it may be okay for ghost-blogging on current cases or events. Those are exactly the types of information that you are proclaiming to understand if you blog about them.

  • http://www.valanduseconstructionlaw.com Timothy R. Hughes

    I do not grasp even the idea of ghostblogging. A service provider offered to help writing content for articles … my reaction was I need to write it. It will take me longer to gut and straighten it out than to just write the article.
    I also agree that ultimately, this also completely misses the chance to develop a voice, personality and relationship with readers and thought influencers through one’s posts.

  • http://www.theincslingers.com/blog Simon Salt

    Oh good grief another “touchy feely” blog post about how Social Media is all about “Social media is about engaging others so as to build and nurture meaningful relationships”, please kill me now. Social Media is a tool within marketing communications, nothing more nothing less. Saying its all about “engagement and relationships” not only reveals the writers naivety but lack of understanding about Social Media. Are telephone sales about nurturing and relationships? A company calling me at home is reaching out to me, they are listening to me, they are talking to me. No of course not. Social Media is about results just like any other marketing tool. Ghostwriting is prevalent in all forms of marketing. Social Media isn’t exempt. There are a lot of reasons it works and it depends entirely on how its done as to whether it works. If the intent is to deceive then it should absolutely be condemned but only in the same way as deception in any other form of marketing should be condemned. Please don’t try and make Social Media into Socialist media.

  • http://www.nofunnylawyers.com/ Jim Thomas

    Well before blogging and social media, services sold canned articles for mailed newsletters, and that is exactly how they appeared to clients and potential clients–canned. When I wonder about the time I spend on my blog, I remind myself that I want to be real. If the blog helps people appreciate who I am before they meet me, I believe they are likely to be better clients. To Simon’s point, that is a result I’m willing to invest some time, rather than $, in.

  • http://kevin.lexblog.com Kevin OKeefe

    I still see the problems of ghostwriting when the ghosting is being done by your own law firm’s employees Doug. Not from an ethical standpoint, but from a practical standpoint.
    I don’t buy as Simon suggests that social media is just about pushing content at people – doesn’t matter who publishes the content, it’s just like junk mail arriving in your mail box at the foot of your drive way.
    Blogging, especially for lawyers, provides a means for clients and potential clients to develop an intiment relationship with a lawyer before ever contacting the lawyer. That doesn’t come from content alone.

  • wendy

    I think you make a excellent point! your post sets me to thinking… Law firms doing that are providing a service by sharing the summaries they prepare. They’re also making the information more freely accessible than in an email alert in that the content is immediately indexed on Google and picked up on Google Blog Search by people following topics referenced.I’m a girl who likes tiffany and tiffany jewelry!
    You always have good info here. Please keep it up!

  • http://www.hellermanbaretz.com/ John Hellerman

    Maybe it’s just the apocalyptic headline but in light of our previous conversations Kevin, I was surprised by your take yesterday on the topic of ghost-blogging.
    I think everyone would agree that merely purchasing a stream of content on an issue and passing it off as your own work crosses an ethical line. However, hiring a professional communicator to provide help and support so you can articulate your ideas clearly and with value to your intended audience is not only ethical but smart and efficient too.
    Let’s face it, most attorneys simply don’t have the time conceptualize, research, and craft interesting and worthwhile blog posts from scratch the once or twice a week necessary to keep a blog lively — let alone daily. So, having writing and research support from firms like mine is a virtual necessity these days for busy lawyers that want to have compelling, successful blogs.
    As far as transparency goes, I don’t agree at all that blog posts should be placed in a different category, requiring greater transparency, than professional writings such as journal articles and even summary judgment briefs. The issue is not transparency or even whether a post originates in-house versus externally; the issue is whether the content is an authentic representation of the blogger’s voice and experience. If it is and that voice is compelling, it will work, and if it isn’t or that voice is not compelling, it won’t — no matter who created the first draft.
    If you expect blogs to continue to be authoritative sources of information and new ideas in the legal community, and if you want more high-profile, forward-thinking attorneys to join the blogging ranks (which I was under the impression you did), then get comfortable with ghost-written blogs: you’re going to see more of them.

  • http://www.impirus.com/ Kelly Spradley

    What’s next? If your ghost can Tweet and Blog, why not send him to lunch for you? Maybe he can accurately convey your personality to a potential client.

  • http://www.hellermanbaretz.com/ John Hellerman

    Kelly, good point: of course you’d never send someone to “play you” at a lunch. But, to my earlier point, if it’s important enough to you to make the most of it, you’d be smart to have someone brief you on the personality of your companion before you go, and to make sure your clothes match and that you don’t have any food from breakfast stuck in your teeth.

  • Jade

    Can any one of you cite a client who “develop(ed) an intiment relationship with a lawyer before ever contacting the lawyer”. Can you show blog posts by a lawyer and comments back from a not-yet client? I don’t mean to be snide, I would really like to know. One reason I’m skeptical is that I know I would never choose an attorney on the basis of their blog. If anything, I’d be more likely to decline to contact them because they either offended me or I found them unimpressive. ANd from what I’ve seen in terms of comments, I’d say the only people reading a lawyer’s blog are other lawyers. Perhaps that’s how client interest is generated; devoted readers in a different practice area make referrals when their clients need help outside their expertise?