Building relationships with reporters through your blog

Earlier this week, John Schwartz, the National Legal Correspondent for the New York Times, wrote a story on the implications of social media for lawyers. I a disagreed with the underlying message of his story and blogged my position.

Schwartz being a good reporter was monitoring his name or the url of the story from nytimes.com via a blog search and a newsreader. Perhaps, the New York Times uses a more sophisticated means to follow what is being said about their stories. In any case, the folks who work there are smart enough to monitor what is being said about them and their work product on the net.

A day after my blog post I got an email from Schwartz commenting on what I said. I reply via email with my position and though we may disagree on this issue, I asked if he'd be interested in having lunch next time I was in New York City. He responded, 'Sure.' I then connected with Schwartz on LinkedIn so I'd remember to look him up when I head to New York.

Now what are the odds a snot nosed kid who grew up and practiced law in a small town on the Mississippi River gets the chance to meet the the National Legal Correspondent for the New York Times when he goes to New York? John can make light of the fancy title, but to me, meeting folks like this is still a big deal.

Imagine I don't have a blog. After reading the story, I call up John and say 'Hey, I think you're out to lunch on that story, let me give you my two cents, let's exchange emails, let's connect on LinkedIn, and when I am in the city, let's do lunch.' Maybe John says great. But many reporters would say 'who the hell are you?' And I don't think I would have had the balls to do it.

But my blog allowed me to express my view, connect with John, and meet him down the road. I'm establishing a relationship with an influencer when it comes to the law. Reporters at major publications have that status.

What does that relationship do for me? I don't know, but I'll take it. Maybe John uses me as a source to get info on a story he's doing (truth be told, he did call me last week on the above story). Maybe I get to share my views on how lawyers can network through the Internet to help others, do practice development, and improve the image of the legal profession. In that those are the things that get me out of bed each morning, that's good.

I see so many law firms and other companies hiring PR agencies to pitch things to the press and line up interviews for their principals. Maybe it's a great way to get news coverage and an excellent way for reporters to work up a story. But it's awfully expensive and establishes no meaningful relationships between reporters and sources.

LexBlog's been around for six years. We've never sent out a press release nor hired a PR person. I've talked to countless reporters, editors, and publishers in the trade press trade as well as in the mass media. Many have become friends. It's all come about through my blog, as I used it here, and now Twitter.

PR professionals, especially those who know how to use social media and social networking, remain a great resource to law firms and other companies. But using your blog to build relationships with the press can go a long way.

Lawyers are often scared to death of the press, afraid they'll say something that'll get them in trouble or be 'misquoted.' Law firm communications professional are often charged with controlling communications with the press. 'No one talks with anyone unless it's vetted by me.' That's nuts.

Reporters, editors, and publishers are people just like you and me. They have a job to do and they like doing that job with people they know, people they like, and people who can be a great resource for them. Your blog can get you to be one of those people.

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

NY Times misses boat on legal ethics versus lawyers online activity

By now, a lot of you have seen the New York Times' national law reporter John Schwartz's Sunday story entitled 'A Legal Battle for Lawyers - Online Attitude vs. Rules of the Bar.' What a disservice to the American lawyer and the public we serve.

With thousands of lawyers making a positive difference in other's lives through the effective use of the Internet, Schwartz uses as the basis for his story isolated incidents where lawyers have run into trouble because of ill-advised blog posts.

  • Hot headed Florida lawyer, Sean Conway, 'was steamed at a Fort Lauderdale judge, so he did what millions of angry people do these days: he blogged about her, saying she was an 'Evil, Unfair Witch.'
  • Illinois lawyer, Kristine A. Peshek, 'wrote posts to her blog in 2007 and 2008 that referred to one jurist as 'Judge Clueless' and thinly veiled the identities of clients and confidential details of a case, including statements like, 'This stupid kid is taking the rap for his drug-dealing dirtbag of an older brother because 'he's no snitch.' '
  • Frank R. Wilson, a lawyer in San Diego, caused a criminal conviction to be set aside and sent back to a lower court because of his blog postings as a juror.
  • A Texas lawyer, after getting a trial delayed because of a death in the family, caught the wrath of Judge Susan Criss of the Texas District Court in Galveston when he posted on his Facebook page about 'One night drinking wine, another night drinking mojitos, another day motorbiking,' during the week of the funeral.

So what do we have?

  • Tens of thousands of American lawyers blogging so as to share legal information with the public and accelerate the pace of legal discourse among the profession.
  • Probably hundreds of thousands of people in the legal industry (lawyers, law professors, law students, law librarians, legal marketing and communication professionals, knowledge management & other law firm administration folks) using Facebook to network with friends and peers.
  • Ten thousand or more legal professionals using Twitter so as to discover the people they'd like to get to know or know better.
  • Over 600,000 users of LinkedIn listing the 'practice of law' as their profession to network with peers, industry leaders, reporters, conference coordinators, clients, referral sources, and the the lke.

And a Sunday New York Times story highlighting the online stupidity of four lawyers with quotes from leading legal ethics professionals saying that when you, as a lawyer, behave like an idiot online, you can get into trouble.

Let's not leave our common sense at the door when it comes to lawyers' use of the Internet and online social media. Sure, the net and social media are new for lawyers. So was the telephone, the fax machine, cell phones and email. Despite some early hysteria about the dangers and legal ethics of those four, we've learned to adapt.

The cat is out of the bag on the legal profession's use of the net and social media. The shouting of legal ethic's issues by the ill informed is not going to put it back in the bag. And that's a good thing for lawyers and the American public.

So when you hear of the very isolated examples of problems with lawyers' use of the net, keep it in perspective. People, even good people, will do dumb things. But the good things achieved by lawyers through the use of the net and social media far outweigh the bad.

Moderating law blog comments : The New York Times protocol

law blog commentsFor law firms looking to establish a standard protocol for moderating comments on their blog (not everyone can take the Greenfield or O'Keefe do as we feel approach), the New York Times standard may be apropos.

The New Times frequently asked questions about comments provides straight forward answers of the follow questions:

  • Why do you moderate readers' comments?
  • What kind of comments are you looking for?
  • Do you edit comments?
  • When and where will my comment be displayed?
  • Should I use my real name when making a comment?
  • What about criticism of The Times?
  • Should I post new information about a breaking news story? What if I see an error in a blog post or article? What is the best way to suggest a correction?

I've heard the trail to success leaves clues. Putting aside any political views you have of the paper, you could do worse than following the editorial standards of the Times.

Bloggers realize self-interest isn't everything

Traditional economic models assume that people are self-interested, they do things which are in their financial interest. But at some point, people begin acting for the greater good. This per the New York Times' Robert Frank's article, 'When Self-Interest Isn't Everything.'

Though Frank's article was about the phenomenon of political campaigns driven by supporters' willingness to set narrow self-interest to one side, I couldn't help but think of bloggers publishing content for the greater good. Especially blogging lawyers giving away knowledge they usually sell.

We already have 5 or 10 thousand lawyers engaging in online conversations offering insight and commentary in niche areas of the law. We're accumulating free legal information at speeds never seen before. Thousands of legal blog posts per day is going to turn into tens of thousands of posts by the end of this decade.

Turns out lawyer dissatisfaction with their careers may be the reason why lawyers have chosen to blog for the greater good. It's personal disappointment that gets people to put self-interest aside per Frank's article.

Albert O. Hirschman, an economist at the Institute for Advanced Study at Princeton, was one of the first to grapple seriously with [the concept of participating in something larger than oneself]. In his 1982 book 'Shifting Involvements,' he acknowledges that self-interest indeed appears to be the dominant human motive in some eras. But over time, he argues, many people begin to experience disappointment as they continue to accumulate material goods. When consumption standards escalate, people must work harder just to hold their place. Stress levels rise. People become less willing to devote resources to the public sphere, which begins to deteriorate. Against this backdrop, disenchanted consumers become increasingly receptive to appeals from the organizers of social movements.

Eventually, Mr. Hirschman argues, a tipping point is reached. In growing numbers, people peel away from their private rat race to devote energy to collective goals. The free-rider problem ceases to inhibit them, not only because they now assign less value to private consumption, but also because they find satisfaction in the very act of contributing to the common good. Activities viewed as costs by self-interest models are thus seen as benefits instead.

Though Frank's reports a cycle of working for the greater good may only last for 20 years before people resume pursuing private accumulation, I'll take a 20 year wave of lawyer blogging. Not because of my own pecuniary interests, but because blogging is good for lawyers and our society at large.

NY Times takes major stake in blog platform

The New York Times has invested $30 Million in Automattic, the web based commercial arm of the Wordpress blog platform.

Law professor to blog for New York Times : Opportunities await law bloggers

Law Blog Professor Steven DavidoffWayne State University Law School Professor Steven Davidoff is going to be blogging full time with the New York Times.

He's hooking up with the New York Times DealBook as the Deal Professor. Steven says not to worry.

...[I]t will be the same blog covering the same topics with the same length of posts and legal analysis, just with the expanded resources of those great N.Y. Times deal reporters, including Andrew Ross Sorkin and Michael de la Merced.

Expect more lawyers to become bloggers for major publications and news websites. Lawyers are killer reporters and commentators on niche legal subjects. And who's got more domain expertise?

Plus, with declining circulation of hard copy newspapers and increasing online readership, newspaper revenues are in decline. Though online revenues are on the rise, they can't match the loss of hard copy advertising and subscription revenues. As a result, newspapers and media centers are on the look out for syndicated content from good bloggers.

Golden opportunity for you law bloggers. Whether it be with national mass media, national trade media, or local/regional newspapers.

And you don't have to wait for the publications to contact you. Get to know the reporters and editors at publications for which you would like to blog. How? Comment on their stories and blog posts. Right on their news sites and and in your own blog. Send them an email from time to time. Connect with them on LinkedIn.

If you don't get asked to blog for the publication, ask them. Propose that they add a blog and that you write it.

Others following this news

8 reasons why blogging lawyers are happier

Sunday's New Times article brought more attention to lawyers' dissatisfaction with the practice of law.

I'm no mental health expert, but I work with hundreds of lawyers who are blogging. Blogging lawyers are a generally happy breed as well as experiencing a good deal of career satisfaction. I don't think it's any coincidence.

Why are blogging lawyers happier?

  • Blogging lawyers plan for success. All too often lawyers end up working on whatever comes there way. Rather than defining success as working in a niche area of law you would enjoy for the clients you would enjoy working for, you define success as having enough money to keep the wolves away from the door - both at the office and at home. It's then follow the money, as opposed to follow enjoyment. You can have both if you plan.
  • Blogging lawyers work on their success plan. A successful blog begins with the end in mind. What do you hope to achieve? As reputation, type of work you want to do, and the type of clients you want to have. Knowing you are working a career path leading to success is personally rewarding.
  • Success is defined by doing what you love, as opposed to making as much money as possible. People want to make meaning. People want to be proud of what they do. People, including the very wealthy, are not driven by the desire to hold little green pieces of paper in their hands. Defining success as doing something you are passionate about, whether it be advising on security issues for Fortune 200 companies or representing injured workers on compensation claims, brings enjoyment.
  • Writing on an area of law for which you have a passion is enjoyable. You follow what others in your field are writing. You realize what you are sharing has value to others, no matter how small your niche audience may be.
  • Networking with others who have similar passions. It's enjoyable to find out there's others out there who area as passionate as you about a niche area of the law. Better yet, being able to follow what they write via RSS and networking with them via your blog, email, and occasional phone call is a hoot. When you meet up at a conference, you'll have instant friends.
  • Blogging lawyers get known as leading authorities in a niche area of law. We all have egos. Getting known as an expert feeds that ego.
  • Blogging lawyers get work by word of mouth because of their expertise. They become a 'lawyer's lawyer.' Face it, we all looked at the leaders in a niche and imagined how cool it would be to get work because others referred it to us and then screen for the best. It happens over time with blogging.
  • Blogging lawyers regularly get positive feedback from other people. Every lawyer in this country has a letter they keep in their top drawer they pull out on a hard day to remind them why they became a lawyer. It is the letter from somebody who said, "I really appreciate what you did for me, you made a difference for me and my family, and you really helped me on this matter." You keep that letter. But you do not get those every day. You do not get them every month. You may not even get them once a year. With blogs you get that type of feedback on an ongoing basis.

There's probably eighteen other reasons why lawyers who blog effectively are happier. Let me know of other reasons you think of.

Lawyers 'feel' lack of prestige in profession : New York Times

The biggest lesson I learned in 17 years of practicing law was that you couldn't separate who you are and what you stood for as a person with who you were and what you did as a lawyer. If the two didn't mesh, it meant for a big psychological drag. The symptoms of this drag: 'wondering if this was all the law was about?' and at times, worse, 'depression.'

In this mornings New York Times Alex Williams writes about the struggles of our legal profession and its fall from grace along with another noble profession, being a doctor. It's the latest in what seems to be onslaught of press and Internet discussion about lawyers being unhappy with their work. Money's not enough.

The pay is still good (sometimes very good), and the in-laws aren't exactly complaining. Still, something is missing, say many doctors, lawyers and career experts: the old sense of purpose, of respect, of living at the center of American society and embodying its definition of 'success.'
.....
...[M]any doctors and lawyers still find the higher calling of their profession -- helping people -- as well as the prestige and money, worth the hard work. And the stars in either field are still that: commanding the handsome compensation and social cachet. But to others, the daily trudge serves as a constant reminder that the entrepreneur's autonomy simply can't be found in law or medicine.

How bad is it? Per the Times' Williams:

  • Forty-four percent of lawyers recently surveyed by the American Bar Association said they would not recommend the profession to a young person.
  • Law firms lose, on average, nearly a fifth of their associates in any given year.
  • 20 percent of lawyers will suffer depression at some point in their careers.
  • Law school applicants dropped to 83,500 in 2006 from 98,700 in 2004--representing a 6.7 percent drop between 2006 and 2005, on top of the 5.2 percent slip the previous year.
  • As firms demand ever more billable hours, lawyers find less time for pro bono work -- the very thing that once gave them a sense of higher calling.

I'm not an expert, I just lived it. But I agree with Richard Florida, the author of 'The Rise of the Creative Class: And How It's Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life,' who told Williams 'There used to be this idea of having a separate work self and home self. Now they just want to be themselves. It's almost as if they're interviewing places to see if they fit them.'

If you're struggling as a lawyer, find something you love doing. Do work you'll find personally and professionally rewarding. May hurt in the pocketbook in the short term, but it's worth it.



Related post



Other takes on this NY Times article

NY Times to start using amateur video

NY Times amateur videoFurther evidence that we're at the cusp of blended pro-am journalism is New York Times decision to start using videos produced by citizen journalists.

Per Beet.TV, the videos will run starting tomorrow on the Op-Ed pages of the NYTimes.com. They'll cover the political campaign and be uploaded through February 5, 'Super Tuesday.'

An example of a unedited video interview of Mike Huckabee can be accessed here. These down to earth interviews by average folks are pretty cool.

What's this have to do with lawyers? A lot. Lawyers are already amateur journalists through their well done law blogs. Taken a step further and such blog content is going to be syndicated as legal scholarship and commentary to third party publications or platforms, just as the video is syndicated to the NY Times here.

Beyond text, lawyers are going to move to video, both of themselves reporting on niche areas of the law and interviewing third parties, which these lawyers are uniquely qualified to produce because of their domain expertise.

Source on post: ReadWriteWeb

Steal my content, please!

That's the title of a post from Robert Scoble last week. He was responding to Susan Mernit's report that Lane Hartwell was so pissed with people stealing her photographs that she decided to take her photos out of the public eye.

After offering up a way to watermark the photos and keep them online, Scoble says he's just the opposite.

I WANT YOU to steal my content. In fact, next year I'm going to do stuff to make all my content available via Creative Commons license so you can use it whereever and whenever, including my video shows. I'd like a credit, yes, but don't demand it. I'd rather just add to the human experience and if that means that other people make money off of my work, so be it.

I've found that the more I give away my content, the more magical stuff happens to me anyway and if that means my photos or writings or videos get used in some way that I don't really like, well, that's a risk I'm willing to take. Lane obviously is not.

Plus, today I have a little less competition from Lane, who was a great photographer but who's work will be hard to discover now.

I'm right there with Scoble. And you lawyers should be wanting people stealing your blog content. The more it's stolen by blockquote, reference and link, the easier for the world to discover you. And isn't that what's it all about, getting known for our expertise?

Want further evidence that you want people stealing your content? Scoble cites the New York Times whose traffic has taken off since removing its subscription pay wall in September.

As Scoble says, '...[W]hen you try to hold onto your content too tightly fewer people are able to find it.'