Real Lawyers Have Blogs : Law Blogs, Social Media, Twitter

Attorney Scott Greenfield aptly addresses the myth of immediate legal marketing success from blogging in a post this morning. Greenfield's right in that many lawyers wrongly expect immediate business development success from blogging and that companies selling blogs and legal marketing solutions to such lawyers are wrongfully promising such success.

Greenfield, after presenting yesterday at a Florida Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers conference with Attorney Mark Bennett, voices his frustration with what he saw from his lawyer audience.

There was a bottom line here, and one that disturbed me. If there was one question that permeated all others, it was clear and simple: How do I make this work to get business now?

There was a voice in their head that told them that the whole point of the internet was to make money. It was the voice of the marketers, whispering that the internet would fill the voids in the day with new clients, flush with enough cash to pay both fees and costs.

And the problem per Greenfield is that lawyers, and most legal marketers, can't get beyond the idea that the Internet could be used for anything other than making a buck.

The marketers have done their job well. It's not just that they believe, but that they can barely imagine any other purpose, any other benefit to be had. A conversation?  What a waste of time. All that effort to write a blog post just to have a conversation when you can chat with the guys at the bar, or the lawyer in the office next door if you feel the need. Oh no, this is about ROI. Put in the time to write, and there's got to be a fee at the end of the rainbow.

Assuming blogging's a way to get work fast, lawyers, assuming they did something wrong, get taken.

The problem was that many were trying, and paying some silly numbers to marketers who swore they would make them rich, and it wasn't happening. The lawyers quietly licked their wounds, assuming it was their fault. They must be doing something wrong. If everybody else was online, making oodles of money, why were they the only one sucking wind?......But they weren't failures, even though they thought they were. They were lied to and, like most victims of scams, didn't want to admit they were foolish enough to be taken. And taken, they were.

Greenfield's right.

• Blogging doesn't bring immediate marketing success.
• Blogging is more than marketing. It's a conversation where you listen first. A conversation, if done in a fashion where you give more than you expect in return, results in an enhanced reputation as a trusted professional.
• Blogging for business development is all about networking through the Internet. Networking online, as is the case offline, takes time and effort. Though the extent of one's reach and the fruits of one's labor may be greater networking online than offline.
• Successful blogging is also done for professional development. Good law bloggers are networking with their peers and other professionals in their town, and across the country, so as to grow professionally. Such lawyers know that the law is a skilled trade, and that getting better at one's trade enhances one's reputation.
• Blogging is about establishing a word of mouth reputation, exactly the thing which good lawyers know leads to the best clients.
• Many legal marketing companies are driven more by making a buck off lawyers than providing value so as to improve the lives of lawyers. The leaders of such companies, who don't blog for professional development, know little about networking through the Internet for professional and business development. The companies aren't led by lawyers who have practiced law for any length of time. They don't know what it takes to be successful as a lawyer -- and a professional.

Guys like Greenfield and Bennett have rightfully challenged me on the blogging front ---and they continue to do so. As Father Ted Hesburgh says, "You don't learn from people who tell you you're a wonderful guy. You learn from people who say you know you have a long way to go..."

We do have a long way to go in getting lawyers to understand why other lawyers blog -- and how those lawyers who feel successful from blogging define that success. It'll be one day, and one lawyer, at a time.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (9)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

West Publishing, founded in 1872 in St. Paul, Minnesota by John West, has been one of, if not the, most prominent legal publishers in the United States for over a century.

West established itself as the nationwide de facto standard used by all federal courts and most state courts for the reporting of legal decisions. The company published countless legal treatises authored by the leading legal scholars of our time. Black's Law Dictionary published by West and the first law book I bought in law school, had a place in every courtroom and law office the entire time I practiced law.

But boy has West Publishing, now part of Thomson Reuters, fallen. West, under the FindLaw brand, is now publishing spam law blogs full of little more than mindless crap, all in the name of selling Internet marketing services to unknowing lawyers. Shameless.

West's slide has come with the roll up of West into what's now known as the global legal division of Toronto based Thomson Reuters. Thomson Reuters (then known as Thomson) purchased West in 1996 and consolidated West and a number of other law book companies into what became know as Thomson West. In 2001, Thomson West acquired FindLaw.com, a free legal information web portal, founded by Stacy Stern and Tim Stanley. Thomson Reuters - West - FindLaw, however they may be now branded, make up this global legal division of Thomson Reuters.

As way of background, spam blogs are blog sites with inauthentic text or or text merely stolen or paraphrased (blog scraping) from other websites. The purpose of such a blog is to get high google search results in order to sell ads on the spam blog or to link to other websites in an attempt to improve the search engine performance of the site being linked to so you may sell ads or services on this second site.

Spam blogs are the rage among two bit scheme artists out hustling a buck. Unfortunately West, under the FindLaw brand, has become one these two bit scheme artists.

Let's look at one of FindLaw's new law blogs, The New York Personal Injury Law Blog, and in particular a blog post about a fatal auto crash reported by WCBS News in New York. The blog post is authored by a Emily Grube, a writing specialist, not a lawyer. Grube also authors other spam blogs for FindLaw.

In this blog post FindLaw regurgitates the facts of a local accident, including listing the names of four people killed in the accident. The post goes on to strategically link keywords related to the law, injury, lawyer, and New York to web pages in the FindLaw Internet directory in which lawyers buy listings and ads.

Grube then has the gall to write if you've suffered a personal injury you can contact a New York personal injury lawyer, of course linking the text 'personal injury lawyer' to FindLaw's directory. The post does not allow for comments, nor is there any attempt at creativity or analysis.

Imagine scraping the names of four of someone's loved ones killed in an accident from a news website story for a blog post so you can use the term 'wrongful death.' Your goal being to link the term 'wrongful death' to a FindLaw website page where people may search for injury lawyers who pay to pay to be in the FindLaw directory. Ambulance chasing at its worst. But FindLaw did it.

Imagine scraping the names of four of someone's loved ones killed in an accident from a news website story for a blog post so you can say 'can still sue that man's estate.' Your goal being to link the phrase 'can still sue that man's estate' (also done in the subject post) to a FindLaw website page where people may search for probate lawyers who pay to be in the FindLaw directory. Disgusting. But FindLaw did it.

There's even more garbage in this FindLaw spam blog. Look in the about section in the right hand column where out of 97 words 37 words are keywords related to New York and injury law. It takes a real 'writing specialist' to write crap like this:

The New York Personal Injury Law Blog covers news and developments in the area of personal injury and tort law in New York state, and New York City specifically, and helps to connect people with New York injury lawyers. The New York Personal Injury Law Blog is intended to serve as a resource for people working through a personal injury issue in New York, or those who are interested in New York personal injury and tort law generally, including New York personal injury attorneys who wish to keep up with the latest news developments.

I'm not alone in my criticism of FindLaw. Leading New York Attorney Eric Turkewitz labels the blog publishers on spam blogs, and in this case FindLaw's blogs, as dreck-bloggers. (dreck defined as "excrement; dung")

[They] aren't interested in creating good content, they simply regurgitate local accident or arrest stories and place a call-to-action link at the bottom. Posts are filled with buzzwords to game Google that, if coupled with the call-to-action for a recent event, places them firmly in the camp of Solicitation 2.0, a subject I dealt with two years ago. Put bluntly, many of these dung-blogs are electronically soliciting clients. E-chasing, for lack of a better word.

Widely respected blogger and New York Attorney, Scott Greenfield, commenting on FindLaw's blogs:

These aren't blogs, of course, in the sense that we understand them. There are mere names designed to trade in on search engine keywords, and capitalize on FindLaw's SEO ability to get their scam blogs higher than yours on the search engine's first page.

San Diego Attorney Marc Randazza asked 'FindLaw, are you really that douchetastic?'

They hired a milquetoast writer to author a milquetoast blawg for the sole purpose of selling ad space to sh*tty lawyers who can't develop a reputation on their own.

FindLaw's conduct is beneath everything we have the right to expect from companies serving the legal profession. Rather than conduct itself in a way that improves the image of lawyers and upholds the dignity of our profession, FindLaw gets down in the gutter so it can sell marketing services to lawyers who have not a clue what FindLaw is doing to trash our profession. A profession in which West Publishing once played a proud role.

Boy has a first class legal publishing company once held in esteem by lawyers, judges, and law schools fallen. All in the name of greed.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (21)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

I'm getting sick of lawyers leaving comments here under the name 'DC Divorce Lawyer' or 'Injury Lawyer.' Is that what your kids call you? Is that how you get introduced when speaking to a group? You mean you use your real name. Amazing.

Why not have the decency to use your name when participating in conversations on my blog and other blogs around the net? Blogs really are conversations.

Even if you don't care whether you look like an idiot, lawyers publishing blogs aren't blogging for the benefit of sleazy lawyers looking for a free way to get SEO for their blog or website. It may sound unbelievable, but lawyers are blogging to provide value to a growing Internet discussion, not for SEO to get traffic to a website.

I'm not the only one calling out lawyers on this junk. Widely read Scott Greenfield has said he'll delete the comments and ban you. Scott also rightfully points out that you look like a 'blithering idiot' in spamming blogs, especially when paying SEO snake oil sales people to do it for you.

Worse than having your comments deleted is having them marked junk by the blog publisher. Junk filters work behind the scenes across tens of thousands of blogs at once. When I mark something as junk it alerts the junk filtering system that everyone else is using to mark as junk all blog comments coming from your ISP. Junk comments, like junk email, are never displayed, they are filtered out.

Why do lawyers do this crap? For SEO. They are being told they need links to their website or blog with the anchor text (words in link) describing what they do. They are further being told that blogs are nothing more than a way to get SEO.

Problem is that SEO spam is as offensive as spam email. Worse than spam email, SEO spam is on display for all. Shows the world how tasteless lawyers can be. Lawyers are among the worst, if not the worst, SEO spam artists on the net.

I have championed the Internet and blogs as the great equalizer for good lawyers in their marketing battle against the lawyers with all the money. I'd like to see good lawyers who give of their time by offering information and insight get the good work.

Greenfield has contended that lawyers will ruin a good thing like blogs. Though I remain an optimist, it's sad to see lawyers who do not give a darn about their reputation or the reputation of our legal profession spam away like this.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (19)
• Trackbacks (1)
• Share Link

Thanks to all the folks at the New York City Bar Association (NYCBA) for hosting the blog panel presentation on Tuesday evening. Great job.

Thanks also to blogging Attorneys Scott Greenfield, Dan Clement, and Eric Turkewitz (going right to left, not in order of prominence Greenfield), my co-panelists. Well done guys.

The NYCBA doesn't screw around. We covered a lot of ground for the 50 plus in attendance. The program went 3 hours strong running from 6 to 9 PM. From what I could tell from the re-runs of the debate, that's more people than were attending live the Obama - McCain town hall forum that was running opposite of us.

We reviewed the basics of blogs, blog publishing platforms, better blogging practices, RSS and how to use it, the marketing of your blog, and little a social media. Even got into a little debate on topics such as what makes for a successful blog, whether lawyers will keep blogging, and the merits of using a blog for marketing. I suspect Turkewitz and Clement felt a little 'stuck in the middle' with Greenfield and I calling BS on the other.

Surprisingly no one in the audience was the user of RSS feeds and a newsreader. Even a couple years ago, I'd get a few RSS users in the crowd. Hope that's not typical of all New York lawyers, you're missing out on a powerful way to receive excellent information.

You may download a copy of PowerPoint we used here. As always, feel free to borrow as much or little of it as you like for your own presentation on law blogs. Also feel free to call or email me for additional information you may need or questions you have in preparing for presentations to your law firm or group.

A video recording of the presentation is coming out from the NYCBA. I still get people calling me saying they watched the whole 3 hour video from the program we did in '06. I'm tempted to say get a life.

For you folks that haven't seen the NYCBA building, check it out. Sits on 44th between 5th and 6th among old stand alone granite buildings like the Harvard club. Huge rotunda, marble steps, quite a place. We sure don't have anything like that in Seattle where old is 75 years.

Also note that the Memphis Pork Ribs at Virgil's Real Barbecue, where we headed afterwards, ain't too bad either. The Virgil's Ale was a little light by Seattle Micro-Brew standards.

Looking to bring me into your neighborhood to organize a blog panel presentation? Just holler. I'm easy. I'll do it for a beer in most cases - even when I have to buy.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (2)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

There's lawyers who don't care how they get the next client or case. Whether it comes via an ad above a urinal, a two page spread in the yellow pages, or a referral from someone who thought the lawyer was pretty good, they just don't care.

In fact some lawyers would rather see their name at the top of search results or on the back of a phone book than have a reputation as a trusted and reliable authority in a niche area of the law. Wonderful that these cads are in the same profession as you and I who went to law school to right a few wrongs and to take pride in what we do.

The latest comes from lawyers throwing money down a rat hole by paying unscrupulous SEO-Search Engine Optimization clowns to get spam links via comments on good law blogs.

Scott Greenfield explains how the spam comments on law blogs scheme works.

One of the latest [trends] that has hit Simple Justice fairly hard is the latest effort in advertising by desperate lawyers, who apparently pay someone else to post comments to a blawg (such as this) with a link to their website.

The name of the commenter is listed as 'Miami Lawyer' and the link is to some Miami lawyer's website.  One might think that the concept would be followed through with some further degree of thought, such as searching for posts that relate in some way to stories about Miami, so that people who read the comments to the story might have a better chance of being interested in Miami lawyers.  Not so.

In the course of a day, I get one individual posting a dozen comments to miscellaneous old posts without any apparent nexus to each other or the geographical or subject matter area of the lawyer.  Each will link back to this 'Miami Lawyer's' website.  But here's the rub:  The comment is written in broken English and fails to demonstrate any knowledge of the content of the post.

Example: Greet to the webmaster for this wonderful site.Keep up good work.

This is the actual comment left yesterday.  To the Miami Lawyer who paid someone to leave this comment and link to his website, this word of advice.  It makes you look like a blithering idiot.  Is that what you are trying to accomplish?

As Scott explains the comments usually say 'nice job on the blog' or something else complimentary. So lawyers new to blogging are apt to keep the comments up. Don't. You'll just be supporting the sleaze and lazy of our legal profession.

And for lawyers buying SEO from guys that sound and behave like crack cocaine dealers, follow Scott's advise.

...[A]s a public service to anyone foolish enough to pay good money to some advertising 'solutions' company that outsources its work to people who will make you look far more pathetic than you are, let me say this.  Don't do it.

You are wasting your money.  You are not going to get any cases from comments that make you look stupid.  You are going to have your comments deleted, and then I'm going to ban you from here.

If you're really trying to market yourself by establishing yourself as an authority in the legal blogsophere, do it the old fashioned way. By working at it.

Subscribe to blogs in your niche as well as keywords and key phrases via Google Blog Search and Google News. Comment on other blogs - both on your own blog and in the comment field on other law blogs.

And at all times, add value to the discussion. You went to law school. You have 7 years of college and graduate education. It is actually possible to offer insight and commentary, as opposed to looking for the next get rich/cut corners advertising scheme.

Working at blogging the old fashioned way will get you plenty of links - and others citing you and your content throughout the net. I know you may not care, but it will save you money and get you more legal work.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments (6)
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

I was going to post this am lauding lawyers for well done blogging and encouraging them to continue the cause. Then Scott Greenfield to the rescue with his post challenging practicing lawyers to keep blogging.

I suspect that there's a wave of burnout happening amongst the trench people.  Without any big news, something to grab their attention and make them want to write, they're getting tired of sitting at the computer.  It's not like the spirit of Kevin O'Keefe resides in each of us.  Some need extra motivation to get their mojo working.

With that in mind, I pose a challenge to my brethren in the practical blawgosphere.  Unless you want to see the lawprofs and nutjobs (note that they are two separate groups in my mind) seize control, fight.  No, you don't have to post as much as I do.  I just like to write.  It's my therapy, but it doesn't have to be yours.  Just don't let inertia take hold.  Once you walk away from the computer, it's hard to get back into the flow.

The practical blawgosphere is one of the best things that's happened to the discussion of criminal law.  We've sparred with one another, agreed with one another, but expanded the understanding and debate far beyond anything that existed in the old days.  New lawyers can come online and learn from the mistakes that old lawyers made.  My personal depth of understanding has increased enormously thanks to the insights of others.

Don't let this fade away.

We have so much to gain as a profession and a society by encouraging those lawyers who blog to keep blogging and by encouraging lawyers who don't blog to take up the cause.

Look what we receive personally, as a profession, and as a society from lawyers blogging.

• We make the law more accessible. Who is better equipped to the share practical legal information than lawyers practicing in a niche area of the law? Answering common questions. Sharing what we've seen on blogs and in the news sharing our insight and commentary. It's great stuff never before available.
• Blogs make us better lawyers by allowing us to reach out to experts in our field and collaborate with them. If I'm a recent law grad in New York whose heart is in doing criminal defense work, I can follow leading criminal defense law blogs. I can reach out to guys like Scott Greenfield as a mentor. I tried to do that as a young lawyer but it took trips across my state to legal conferences (when I could afford them). I tried to find mentors, but it was tough and intimidating to collaborate with leading lawyers. Blogs break down those barriers.
• We showcase ourselves and other lawyers to those in need of legal services. Whether a corporate executive or a single mom who's deadbeat ex is refusing to pay support, those in need of legal services can see the lawyers who care about what they do and see their thinking in action.
• Many lawyers love what we do. Why not a way a to share what you love and get positive feedback from like minded lawyers and the public. It's good for the psyche.
• Blogging lawyers are improving the image of our profession. Sending $3,000 to Martindale-Hubbell for an online listing of your two person firm does nothing to improve the image of our profession. Same for buying sponsored links at Google, or putting up a website that's little more than a shrine to the firm's laurels. Good blogs are educational based, they're focused on information, not on us as lawyers. They're everything good about the legal profession.

We ain't blogging about movies, knitting, or sports. As lawyers, we're blogging about about something that's a lynchpin in a free and democratic society. The law is at at the heart of what allows our America society to function. And the law does not function unless lawyers rally to the cause of making the law accessible, explaining how it works, and taking pride in our profession.

Carry on with the cause guys. Keep the fire of blogging alive. And encourage your fellow lawyers to take up the cause. You're making our society a better place.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks (2)
• Share Link

The 'experts' findings that the public does not trust bloggers is drawing real life stories from bloggers that conflict those findings.

I posted a couple days ago referencing Bill Ives' post about how people do trust the person whose blog they read. Bill continues the discussion this morning referencing a couple situations.

One is Associate Harvard Professor, Andrew McAfee, writing on the value of a blog, who credits his blog for his reputation in the IT field that led to his selection as number 38 on the top 100 Most Influential People in IT by Ziff Davis.

Andrew also highlights another example, that being his Facebook friend, Paul Levy, the CEO of Boston’s Beth Israel Hospital.

He (Paul) brought up the same point - that he can blog on issues he cares about as much as he wants. If the topic is of broad interest and his posts are good, they’ll continue to be read and can help shape thinking on the issue. It occurred to me that without a blog, his ability to do this is greatly reduced. Because of his position he might get to write a single opinion piece in the Boston Globe, and I guess his staff could continue to send out PR releases, but that’s about it. His blog greatly amplifies his voice.

And from New York criminal lawyer Scott Greenfield, who's become a trusted legal commentator (whether he'll admit or not):

...It's all about credibility. Who has it and why. There are three primary types of credibility, attributed, ascribed and attained. A snitch, for example, is endowed with attributed credibility, because a cop somewhere says that the snitch is trustworthy. The credibility of the cop is attributed to the snitch, even though the judge doesn't know the snitch from a hole in the wall.

Lawyers have ascribed credibility. We are licensed professionals, having passed a bar exam and been given the imprimatur of the state to be competent to represent people. Our legal opinions, therefore, are theoretically credible by virtue of our education, licensure and status.

But the best credibility is attained. It means we've earned it through our efforts to be credible, to be worthy of someone's belief. After scrutiny of our actions, comments, thoughts and analysis, readers have come to the conclusion that we can be trusted to be accurate and thoughtful. To borrow from John Houseman, we obtained our credibility the old-fashioned way; We earned it.

Sure there are going to be blogs published by folks offering little of value and who don't know what they are doing. For all I know they may be the majority of bloggers.

We even have lawyers and legal marketing professionals who think blogs are nothing more than a tool to achieve high search engine rankings. They don't give a dam whether they're offering anything of value or whether they get their work from a sign on the urinal wall or a blog - 'Just make my phone ring.'

But we have some wonderful lawyers who over a period of time have built up a relationship of trust with their readers. A relationship that is going to serve the lawyer and the public for years to come.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link

1. Rob La Gatta: First off, what do you enjoy most about blogging?

Scott Greenfield: The best part of blogging is being a small part of an enormous conversation on things that interest and matter to me. Whether it’s local or worldwide, and amazingly it sometimes goes worldwide, and whether it’s with laypeople or renown[ed] scholars, everybody gets a seat at the table for the chat. It’s incredible what you can learn.

2. Rob La Gatta: What has been the biggest challenge you’ve faced – either personal or professional – since you became a blogger?

Scott Greenfield: It was surprising to learn how many people read, or at least learn about, the things you post. For me, this has included judges before whom I’m trying cases, who make sure that I know that they know that I was critical of them in the past. That little comment slipped in with a wink will remind you that you had better be prepared to live with your opinions expressed online because they will eventually come back to bite you in the butt.

3. Rob La Gatta: I got the impression through your post on the ABA 100 list and the subsequent discussion in its comments page that you don’t blog just to market yourself. Is this an appropriate assumption to make? If so, why do you blog?

Scott Greenfield: Not only do I not blog to market myself, but I find the idea of self-aggrandizing blogging to be offensive. It defeats the purpose of blogging, to have the freedom to express your views on subjects that matter, as well as assuring that you offer nothing that anybody else will want to read. Nobody wants to read posts about what a wonderful lawyer you are or how brilliant you are. If you’re brilliant, show it by posting substantive pieces.

My blogging is solely for fun. I would (and did) write regardless of whether blogs existed because I feel a desire (compulsion?) to express myself that way. I’m a news junky and seem to have an opinion on a lot of subjects. Writing allows me to get it out, and blogging allows me to have others let me know what they think of my views.

4. Rob La Gatta: Where do you see all this going? Do you believe that legal blogs are a fad that will come and go, or do you think they're reshaping the way lawyers do their job (and if so, how)?

Scott Greenfield: Legal blogs are in their infancy at the moment, but I don’t think they are just a fad. On the other hand, I would anticipate that 90% of the blogs that lawyers start will be abandoned within a year. It takes a lot of work to maintain a blog that people want to read, with a steady, reliable stream of substantive work. The notion that you can start a blog that says nothing, or post every 6 weeks, or write only about what a terrific lawyer you are, and anybody is going to want to read it is simply wrong. The only thing that brings people back is substance, and substance takes effort.

I doubt that blogs will “reshape” the way lawyers do their job. They will provide a new, hopefully more interesting, way to keep abreast of new developments, but they are unlikely to have any great impact on the practice of law.

I do think, however, that blogs are gaining in credibility and influence, and may ultimately have a significant impact on both public and judicial thinking. Blogs are suddenly being cited in opinions, and are influencing mainline media stories. This is huge. There is still a long way to go to establish real credibility, but I think this may be the lasting influence of blogging.

5. Rob La Gatta: If you could provide one bit of advice for a lawyer new to the blogosphere, just starting his or her first blog, what guidance would you give them?

Scott Greenfield: It’s all about substance. If you want anyone to care about what you have to say, then have something to say. But keeping up a blog with substantive posts takes a lot of effort. So if you aren’t having fun, or think you’re going to see some direct financial correlation with your blogging, you’re going to burn out quickly and be very disappointed. So either have fun with it or find a hobby more suited to your interests. Blogging isn’t for everyone.

• Email This
• Print
• Comments
• Trackbacks
• Share Link