FindLaw SEO misconduct : Suggested course of conduct

FindLaw SEOThere's little question in my mind that FindLaw's selling links to law firms in violation of Google's webmaster guidelines was a big mistake.

Not only may FindLaw be liable to law firms for the millions of dollars paid by law firms to FindLaw for these spam links, but FindLaw and its parent company, Thomson Reuters, has damaged its reputation and brand in the eyes of lawyers and the search community, including Google, for years to come.

Dad always said there's a right way and a wrong way to handle everything. FindLaw needs to do the right thing and to do it now.

Here's the right thing to do:

  1. Acknowledge immediately to your lawyer customers who bought the spam links and the legal community as a whole that 'FindLaw, a Thomson Reuters business,' acted wrongly and in violation of Google's webmaster rules.
  2. Apologize immediately to the law firms and the legal community for FindLaw's course of conduct.
  3. Announce immediately that FindLaw will refund within 30 days all the money paid by the law firms for these links.
  4. Perform an immediate accounting of all monies paid for the links by the respective law firms. (Appears to be in the hundreds, possibly thousands of law firms and for all I know could be $3 to $5 million).
  5. Report the results of the accounting publicly.
  6. Hold the FindLaw people who authorized the sale of links, who had to know it was improper, personally responsible. That includes senior management who very likely knew.
  7. Establish an in-house ethics review committee and ethical standards protocol to prevent future improper conduct.

Tuesday will be the 7th day since the news of FindLaw's selling links was reported on the net as well as 7 days from when Google's Matt Cutts became aware of the violation. And at least the 4th day since FindLaw was penalized by having its website PageRank dropped from a 7 to a 5.

FindLaw has chosen not to respond - to the public, to its customers, or to bloggers. This is rather surprising in these days of corporate damage control and where word spreads like wildfire on the net.

I worked as a VP of Business Development for LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell - lawyers.com, FindLaw's largest competitor, following the acquisition of my prior company. I may never have agreed with everything Martindale did, and God knows I am a vocal critic of Martindale here, but Martindale always looked at itself as having a reputation to uphold because of its history and its role in the legal community as a whole.

I can't believe Martindale senior management would have ever allowed this sort of thing, no matter the pressure for incremental revenue. But if Martindale did get itself in trouble, I have to believe it would have held itself accountable to its lawyer customers and the legal profession.

FindLaw needs to act accordingly if it wants to seriously compete with Martindale and lawyers.com, reduce the damage to the Thomson Reuters FindLaw name, and to attempt to reestablish itself as a respected member of our legal community.

The legal community looks forward to FindLaw's response in the next day or two.

Update: Based on an inquiry from a sales rep I want to make myself clear. In no way did I mean to imply that Martindale ever sold spam links - Martindale, to my knowledge, has not ever sold links like FindLaw did. My point was that the Martindale senior management I knew while serving as a VP of Martindale would never have even thought of doing something like FindLaw did.

Related posts:

Don't get left behind, get your own blog

Lexblog

Become a part of the conversation

LexBlog creates and maintains professional, turn-key blogs for law firms and businesses. For more information fill out and send this form or call 1 800 913-0988.

all information is required please

Lawyer directories : LinkedIn has looks of winner

Who would have thunk a professional social networking site could overtake a long standing lawyer directory like Martindale-Hubbell?

But look at the growth in traffic (unique visitors per month) to LinkedIn, Martindale.com, Martindale's consumer-small business lawyer directory, lawyers.com, and FindLaw.com (total traffic, not just lawyers.findlaw.com directory) over the last year. LinkedIn is blowing them all away.

lawyer directory

Think LinkedIn is not a lawyer directory? Think again.

Legal marketing pro, Steve Matthews, reports 98,000 more lawyers have added profiles to LinkedIn in the last two months. Brings the number of lawyer profiles at LinkedIn to, as Steve describes it, 'an incredible 216,000.' Up from the 118,000 I reported in April.

Added to this is the fact that all major law firms have detailed law firm profiles at LinkedIn.

I'm a business person and the first place I go to find information on a lawyer is LinkedIn. Before the lawyer's website. And before a lawyer directory such as martindale.com. The profiles are complete, easy to scan, and let me know if the lawyer is on the ball enough to have a LinkedIn profile.

Looks like I am not alone. As of this May, LinkedIn site traffic was at 5.6 million visitors per month, and was growing at an annual growth rate of 351%. LinkedIn has more than 20 million registered users, spanning 150 industries.

With the features LinkedIn keeps adding and the growth in prospective law firm clients using LinkedIn, I don't know how traditional lawyer directories can keep up.

Follow on posts:

Martindale-Hubbell TV ads for lawyers.com : Will they work?

Martindale-Hubbell lawyers.comWow! Watching the election results this evening I caught a commercial for Martindale-Hubbell's lawyers.com. Traditional lawyer talking with screen shots of the lawyers.com website.

No question such ads will draw traffic to the website. It will put a lot of wind in the sails of LexisNexis Martindale's salespeople calling on lawyers to retain their listings in Martindale-Hubbell, a requirement to be listed in lawyers.com, Martindale's consumer and small business law website. Also puts FindLaw in a difficult position as there's no way FindLaw is going to be running ads on its revenues which are far less than Martindale's.

Something strikes me as odd about the ads though. It would be like Google advertising for people to come to their online directory to do searches so Google could earn more money from ads.

Martindale is selling ads at lawyers.com in the form of directory listings and banner ads on directory pages. Martindale is now buying ads so they can get lawyers to buy ads.

Martindale may have already proven buying ads to sell ads is not a formula for success. Martindale used to do big buys at Google for lawyers.com so that when people searched for a lawyer a large lawyers.com link would display above the organic search results. Martindale appears to have abandoned that ad campaign.

Martindale may be better served by getting its directory of all lawyers indexed in Google, lawyer by lawyer, and do so with a search engine optimization wallop that only Martindale could bring. Lawyers would be lined up to pay Martindale for a listing then. But Martindale, as best as any one can tell, does not allow Google to index all the lawyer bio's and firm profiles that Martindale has.

Martindale has a huge asset. Its lawyer directory is the best in the industry when combining the number of lawyers and detailed biographical information on those lawyers.

At the same time, far more people go to Google for search than lawyers.com. Google perfects its search regularly to better provide what people are looking for, lawyers included. Lawyers.com is an outmoded directory using limited search fields as opposed to a full text search.

Rather than compete with Google (we've seen a lot of losers) why not leverage your asset in conjunction with Google's strength? Wouldn't Martindale be better off using the latest technology to get their lawyers' profiles fully indexed at Google? Wouldn't that be a win/win for Martindale and its lawyer customers?

What say you guys at Martindale?

Martindale-Hubbell ads claim its lawyers.com directory has the 'Best Lawyers?'

Sure looks that way in Martindale-Hubbell's Google ads for their consumer and small business lawyer's directory, lawyers.com. Doing a search for the Best Lawyers directory, here's what I found at the top of the Google's first page.

Martindale-Hubbell lawyers.com

Martindale-Hubbell is buying sponsored links from Google so that when someone searches Best Lawyers, their lawyers.com directory under the heading 'Best Lawyers' appears at the top of Google's search results. Doesn't happen on every search for Best Lawyers, but it's in the Google ad rotation as of Monday night.

Martindale-Hubbell has been a legacy product. It's been the standard bearer as far as lawyer directories. Martindale's peer reviewed ratings is the ratings system we all grew up with as lawyers. Now they are promoting a directory which is open to any lawyer who purchases a listing in lawyers.com as having the best lawyers? In an effort to beat out the Best Lawyers directory when Best Lawyers is searched for at Google?

The Best Lawyers and Super Lawyers lists have historically been subtly dismissed without mention by Martindale in Martindale's surveys claiming it to be the most trusted lawyer directory by far and away. Martindale may not have dissed these lists openly, but there's no question the company has enjoyed the legal communities perception Martindale was above the fray of lists claiming to have the 'best' or 'super' lawyers.

But now we have Martindale buying ads at Google, the number one place where consumers look for lawyers, to get a sponsored link for 'Best Lawyers' on top of Google's organic search results for the Best Lawyers directory. And any reasonable consumer seeing the ad would conclude Martindale is claiming to have the best lawyers in its lawyers.com directory.

Martindale would be better served by going back to its roots. It's what brung you. Claim that you are the legacy directory of choice, the directory that's above the fray of claiming to have the best lawyers. Claiming to have the 'best lawyers' is fraught with peril for Martindale.

Will lawyers have ethical concerns about being listed in a directory now claiming to have the best lawyers when there is no review of the lawyers included in lawyers.com? Will state governing bodies attempt to sanction or limit the use of lawyers.com because of its new claim like has happened in New Jersey with Super Lawyers and Best Lawyers.

No, Martindale hasn't bought ads claiming it's lawyers.com lawyers are 'Super Lawyers.' And don't be surprised if Martindale drops its ads claiming lawyers.com has the 'Best Lawyers.'

Martindale's lawyers.com responds to my criticism with facts on growth

I made a comment or two on the Legal Marketing Association listserv questioning the value of a lawyers.com listing for a plaintiff's trial lawyer. My point was that in larger metro areas a search for a personal injury lawyer may generate a random listing of 50 or 60 law firms, some of which do as much family law and defense work as plaintiff's personal injury work.

Without a way to distinguish the lawyers in the list without going in and out of the law firm's linked Web sites I questioned how well that worked for consumers and at the end of the day the lawyers who paid for those listings.

Following the sale of my previous company to LexisNexis' Martindale-Hubbell, I served as a VP of Business Development at Martindale. I had the good fortune to work with Joe Douress, then and current VP of Business Development for the small and medium firm segment. Joe's a great guy and heads up Martindale's lawyers.com. To his credit, he dropped me an email responding to my comments on the LMA listserv.

Here's the facts on lawyers.com growth per Martindale

  • Lawyers.com alone attracted more than 8.8 million visitors in 2004.
  • 2004 traffic is up more than 50%.
  • Nielsen NetRatings and ComScore rank Martindale's website traffic as #1 in lawyer directories on the web.
  • Martindale's websites attract more monthly lawyer searches than any other source on the web-this includes all search engines (based on share of voice analysis by Comscore and Nielsen)
  • Martindale's websites drive more than 50 million lawyer searches per year (Findlaw's lawyer directory gets less than 15 million)
  • Lawyers.com alone generates more than 1.4 million attorney profile views each month. Martindale.com gets 3x that number.
  • 65% of visitors to lawyers.com say they plan to hire a lawyer within a week; 80% plan to hire within 4 weeks.
  • Martindale just signed deals with NetZero and Juno and now have Lawyer Locator links on both of their homepages. This is driving thousands of searches.
  • Martindale will be announcing some new alliances within the next few weeks that will drive even more traffic.
  • The content and community area of lawyers.com is continuing to grow. Lawyers.com just launched paid sponsorships from this area and the demand was unbelievable from firms wanting to buy placement.

I still believe lawyers must do more than have a listing in the lawyers.com directory to achieve an effective Internet presence to grow their business. However, a listing in lawyers.com linking out to your own search optimized Web site may still be a worthwhile buy as one part of a lawyers Internet marketing plan.

Thanks for responding Joe. There are an awful lot of corporate executives who would not get out and mix it up with some yahoo like me.

Joe and I are continuing to exchange notes so expect more to come folks. Maybe we can get FindLaw to share some information like this as well.

Martindale's lawyers.com launches Spanish version of lawyers.com with MSN

Martindale-Hubbell announced today it has expanded its relationship with MSN to deliver access to Martindale-Hubbell's lawyers.com attorney database of lawyers and law firms from the MSN Spanish-language.

MSN Latino, currently visited by more than 422,000 unique users monthly, will have link on the home page that reads "Busca un Abogado" ("Locate a Lawyer"). When visitors click on the link, they will go to a new Spanish-language version of the lawyers.com home page.

"The Hispanic market is one of the fastest-growing demographic audiences in the U.S. and, by 2020, Hispanics are projected to represent 21 percent of the total U.S. population," said Joseph Douress, vice president of business development and marketing for LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell. "This is an important audience for our customers because 51 percent of U.S. Hispanic households are online and they spend more time on the Web each day than the general marketplace of Internet users."

Though Martindale & Douress made the decision for business reasons, I laud them for being the first major legal publisher to take the first step in helping members of the hispanic community select a lawyer. It's only a first step though as the entire directory may not be translated to Spanish - it may only be the lawyers.com home page. Enough to let the Hispanic community know there is a directory but they will need a translator to effectively use the directory.

Now if we could get lawyers.com to translate the community and content Prairielaw.com sold to Martindale and now incorporated in lawyers.com there would be a heck of a resource for the Hispanic community.