Social media more powerful than SEO for drawing traffic to law blog?

I'm coming to believe that social media performance is more important in drawing traffic to your law blog than any search engine optimization (SEO) you may do. Traffic drawn via social media is also better traffic for you.

Two reasons. One, you draw more traffic to your law blog through the effective use of social media than SEO. Two, traffic drawn to your blog through social media is more preferrable.

I've been blogging less than the mad 2 or 3 posts I've done in the past. However, traffic to my blog for this month is the highest ever.

Why? Because of social media. By social media I mean people passing on to others what I say via a blog post or something I say on Twitter. Plus I've been more active on Twitter.

When I tweet about a blog post of mine, I share word of the post on Twitter. People following me on Twitter, retweet word of my blog post. Through this network I wouldn't be surprised if within an hour of my tweeting about a blog post 25,000 or 30,000 people receive word of my post through Twitter. That's a powerful network.

Without even linking to a blog post of mine, my using Twitter in general draws traffic to my blog. I'm a notorious sharer of news via Twitter. I'll share links to news and blog posts offering my brief commentary. I'll retweet what someone I'm following may have tweeted - so long as it's of interest to my followers. I'll also offer brief commentary without a link or a retweet on various subjects of interest to my followers.

In each case, whether it be a follower of mine on Twitter or a follower of someone who has retweeted what I've said, people look at my Twitter profile. That profile includes a link to my blog. And a lot of people click on that link to find out more about me.

Traffic to a law blog drawn via social media brings higher quality traffic than SEO. Good lawyers get their best work via word of mouth and people doing research on the lawyer. Doesn't matter whether the word of mouth is generated or the research is done offline or online.

Social media traffic drawn to your blog comes because someone else, more likely than not a thought leader in your field, blogged about what you've blogged about or retweeted about something you said or shared on Twitter.

Someone else sharing what you've said is a tacit endorsement of you as an authority. Why else would someone share what you've said with their friends and followers unless they thought enough about you or what you said? People are drawn to look up more about you when you have received a tacit endorsement. Those people end up at your blog.

Take it a step further and realize that these people who see your content via social media and then look you up are more apt to have a keen interest in what you're saying, what you do or about you personally. They're also a tad more advanced than someone, who previously went to the yellow pages, who goes to the Internet and keys in New York City bankruptcy lawyer. You want that kind of traffic to your blog.

Speaking in Toronto yesterday to law firm management professionals with medium and large law firms, I felt very comfortable telling them that social media through blogging was more important than any sort of search engine optimization of their law firms' websites or blogs.

Sure, you want your blog and website optimized by having the right title tags. You also want to have incoming links to your blog and website from other relevant sites. Social media and blogging will get you all the links you need.

But at the end of the day, I just wonder if social media, which includes effective blogging, is not a more powerful way to draw traffic to your blog than search engine optimization?

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 SEO junkies like crack cocaine addicts

LexBlog's VP of Client Development, Kevin McKeown, asked me this morning how I bring lawyers down from their SEO fixation. Thought I'd share with you what I shot to McKeown.

Lawyers addicted to SEO are like crack cocaine addicts who need to get their fix. Don't care how, from whom, or at what price. Just give my fix. As a result they get hooked up with crack cocaine dealers dressed up as SEO consultants - not a good crowd.

Effective blogging on a legal niche propels a lawyer to the top of the Google search results. And not just on what they do and their location, ie, Palm Springs Estate Planning Lawyer, but also for terms on which thousands of people search, ie, living will, estate tax etc. No question, effective blogging gets you found on Google.

But at the end of the day, the search engines are one big yellow pages directory. If you advertised heavily in the yellow pages and your good clients came primarily from the yellow pages, by all means, pour all your marketing and business development time and money into search results. Getting to the top of Google results is like having the first 2 full page spread in the yellow pages.

But if your best clients came by word of mouth, as opposed to the yellow pages, Google is not the be all and end all. You need an effective online presence so that your prospective clients and those who influence them see you as a reliable and trusted authority in your niche. A link from the top of the search results to a web page proclaiming your accolades is not going to do it.

I'm speaking from experience. I was a plaintiff's trial lawyer for 17 years. We spent heavily on advertising. TV, radio, yellow pages. You name it, we did it. But at the end of the year, the largest fees were generated on cases we received by word of mouth.

When I started answering injury law related questions on AOL's message boards in 1996, there were no search engines. But injury victims and their family members saw what I was doing and spread the word across the Internet. Thousands of people, including many from my state of Wisconsin, came to my website where I archived the questions and answers. Work and notoriety as a trusted authority followed - in spades.

Don't get me wrong. Google matters. And good blogging gets you to the top. But Google results is not the leading way the best lawyers get their best clients.

  • The best lawyers get their best work by word of mouth. Period.
  • Word of mouth is generated by being recognized as a reliable and trusted authority in one's practice area. Offline that takes a decade or more for a good lawyer. With effective blogging, a good lawyer can do it in a year or two.
  • Forgo this and you're acknowledging that you'll be on the never ending rat race chasing the top results on search engines, which is like chasing the largest ad in the yellow pages.
  • Better clients come from being an authority and by word of mouth, not from search engines. Good clients are evaluating a lawyers skill, acumen, and passion as well as who is citing that lawyer on line (other bloggers & reporters).
  • An effective Internet presence through effective blogging and the innovative use of social media is achieved by very few lawyers. 99% of lawyers don't know how to do it or are too lazy to learn how. That's far less competition for you. Chasing SEO is something everyone of your competitors is doing.

Better clients. Less competition. Less Cost. Long lasting. What's not to like?

Back to weaning lawyers off their fix. ;)

FindLaw selling links update : Dow Jones reporting FindLaw misconduct and lawyers questioning what FindLaw sold them

FindLaw selling links SEOIn comments on this blog and throughout the blogosphere FindLaw cronies have been denying misconduct in the FindLaw selling links debacle. When the cronies realize they're on the short end of the argument, they just fall back on 'you're just bloggers, you spread rumors, this is why few bloggers are trusted, there's no proof...'

Well the mud just got a little deeper for FindLaw today. Dow Jones' Nat Worden reported this afternoon that FindLaw has been slapped by Google for shady SEO tactics and that lawyers are now questioning the SEO marketing product FindLaw sold them.

Worden explained that FindLaw came up with a 'SEM Advantage' product which cost some lawyers $2,000 per month.

Billed as a "high-octane" way to double or even triple traffic on his site, Newell [FindLaw lawyer customer] and others like him understood FindLaw's SEM Advantage product to be a package of well-placed links designed to lift a Web site's standing in a Google search. But now they're wondering if they're still getting their money's worth.

Worden reports FindLaw may have pulled the wool out from under these lawyers.

Late last month, FindLaw quietly made changes to a link on one of its Web sites leading to Newell's site, which he had received as part of SEM Advantage. It also changed at least 99 other links to the Web sites of law-firm clients after it ran afoul of Google Inc. (GOOG) in the search giant's ongoing efforts to crack down on a practice known as selling "link juice," or Web links designed to boost a Web site's page rankings in a search engine. With the link juice trade springing up as a cottage industry across the entire spectrum of online marketing, Google views it as threatening the quality of its search engine, an asset that has made Google a dominant force in media.

Read on in Worden's article and you'll see that FindLaw made the changes adversely effecting lawyers like Newell because FindLaw had been caught by Google for selling links in violation of Google's guidelines. Something in my opinion, FindLaw knew or should have known it was going to get caught doing.

Worden concludes with what is most alarming, and perhaps why FindLaw is not owning up to its misconduct.

The controversy comes at a difficult time for FindLaw's parent company, Thomson-Reuters, which publishes a news service that competes directly with Dow Jones Newswires and is delivered on the same terminals. Its stock price is down about 20% over the last year amid concerns that the U.S. financial crisis will quash growth in its financial markets division. Investors are counting on its professional division to pick up the slack, and its legal services business, for which Findlaw is a small but important growth engine, made up 66% of that division's revenue in the first half.

Imagine if FindLaw confessed to duping lawyers for millions of dollars (not saying they did, just looks to me like they did). Imagine having to refund millions of dollars. Imagine having to refund these monies after paying millions of dollars in sales commissions on the sale of this 'high-octane SEM Advantage Product.' Imagine how investors would view Thomson Reuter's stock then.

Scary stuff for FindLaw and their parent Thomson Reuters. Scary stuff for lawyers relying on FindLaw going forward.

Related posts:

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:

Google adds search tool to measure searches on particular phrases

Google InsightsAlways happy to share the fruits of their inside work, Google has launched a real helpful tool for focusing your SEO and Web copy efforts. It's called Google Insights for Search.

Per Google, here's how it works.

Google Insights for Search analyzes a portion of worldwide Google web searches from all Google domains to compute how many searches have been done for the terms you've entered, relative to the total number of searches done on Google over time. We then show you a graph with the results, indicating interest over time, plotted on a scale from 0 to 100; the totals are indicated next to bars by the search terms.
.....
On the results page, you'll also see a list of the top searches, top rising searches, and a world heat map graphically displaying the search volume index with regions, subregions, and cities.

Google goes on to explain how Insights will be helpful.

Whether you're an advertising agency, a small business owner, a multinational corporation, or an academic researcher, Insights for Search can help you gauge interest in pertinent search terms.
.....
Insights can help you determine which messages resonate best. For example, an automobile manufacturer may be unsure of whether it should highlight fuel efficiency, safety, or engine performance to market a new car model.

I ran a search on blogs to measure the increased interest over the last 4 years and here's what I got.

blogs
And a search on 'law blogs' gave me the regional interest in law blogs (LexBlog ought to open branch client development offices in DC and New York)
law blogs

as well as search terms and rising searches related to 'law blogs.'

law blogs search

It's not going to work for every keyword or phrase term as some search terms may not receive enough traffic for Insights to generate a report. But on my first look, and based on the comments from bloggers at Google Blog Search, Insights looks to be pretty cool.

Blog spamming by lawyers giving profession a bad name

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.

Law blogs solely for SEO & search engine rankings?

Read that in a comment from Ben Glass to a recent post of mine. '[T]he ONLY reason, in my view, to blog, have a website, etc. is to get your site positioned well in the search engines.'

That's nuts. I'm not sure Ben honestly believes that.

If there's lawyers and legal marketing professionals who honestly believe blogs are only for search engine rankings, I expect they're the ones who previously believed the only way a lawyer could get new clients was through large yellow page ads and other advertising. You know, the biggest and gaudiest ad with call the 1 800 lawyer thing.

They believe Google is replacing the yellow pages for people selecting a lawyer. God forbid you're not at the top of search engine results page of Google when someone searches your town and the type of lawyer you are. 'If I'm not at the top of Google, I'll never get any work. I'll go broke.'

The same thing that has allowed good lawyers, no matter their area of practice, to get good work over the years is why law blogs work so well. The ability to network with thought leaders in your field, influencers within your community, and prospective clients.

When I practiced in a small rural town in the Midwest a leading law firm ran only a very small in column ad in the yellow pages listing their 12 lawyers by name. That's it. Only advertising they did. And they got as much work as anyone in the area in everything - personal injury, divorce, real estate, corporate, estate planning, bankruptcy, probate and what have you.

How they'd do it?

  • By striving to be good lawyers - staying up to speed on legal developments and news that effected their practice.
  • By writing articles for legal publications and regional newspapers.
  • By presenting at seminars and conferences for lawyers and relevant industries.
  • By being well known by the press and being available when reporters need resources or a quote.
  • By becoming leaders regionally and state-wide in bar and legal associations.
  • By networking with good lawyers around the state.
  • By networking with community leaders and influencers in various civic organizations.
  • By being social and cordial with people who influence others in their selection of a lawyer - bailiffs, court clerks, judges, bankers, doctors, insurance agents, realtors, title company personnel, court reporters etc.

They further enhanced their reputation as good lawyers you could trust by networking. Word of mouth spread.

Blogging is a new way of networking with thought leaders, community leaders, the media, current clients, and prospective clients. It's how you further enhance your reputation as a lawyer who can do a heck of a job for people and companies needing legal services in your niche. It's how you generate a word of mouth reputation that's far wider reaching than offline.

Ask any lawyer who knows how to blog effectively. They'll tell you their blog is much more than search engine rankings. Don't get me wrong. Search engine rankings are important, but they'll come anyway through effective blogging.

Let's act like lawyers folks. We didn't go to law school so we could run the largest yellow page ad, billboard, or to rank at the top of something called Google - which in our wildest dreams we could not have dreamed of in law school 30 years ago. What's after Google? You'll be chasing that too with the latest gimmicks.

Rise above the pack. Be the lawyer you want to be in the area of law for which you have a passion. Become a lawyer's lawyer. Establish a reputation that's not fleeting. It can be done via online networking through effective blogging - not by just being at the top of Google.

Why blogs rank high on search engines

It's widely accepted by the legal community that legal blogs achieve higher search engine rankings than law firm websites. Some law firms are even finding launching blogs a more cost effective means of achieving an effect Internet presence than hiring SEO experts to increase the rankings of their website.

Julie Batten at The ClickZ Network sheds some light on why blogs achieve higher rankings.

  • A high number of inbound links (with keyword-rich anchor text).
  • A lot of keyword-rich textual content, with typically a distinct lack of Flash and other non-textual content.
  • An inherent structure that enables the spider to both find and understand site content (e.g., posts are descriptively titled, organized by topical areas, and linked to in a logical manner).
  • A high propensity for being found through popular blog directories or search engines, such as Technorati.

Of course, as Batten notes, Internet users will still need to determine the credibility of websites or blogs at the top of Google's search results. But as a lawyer blogging on a niche topic for which you have first hand expertise, you're a pretty credible source. For Google looking to get get credible informative sites to the top of its search results, mission accomplished.

SEO shenanigans pose danger to law blogs

Lawyers call me all the time wanting a blog for the sole reason of higher search engine rankings. 'I don't care what I have to pay you, I don't want to learn about blogging, and I don't have time to write blog posts, I just want to rank higher than my competitors.'

Though law blogs often rank higher on Google than websites, law blogs don't exist for SEO shenanigans. Law firm website developers and law firm 'SEO experts' who don't have a clue about blogs don't understand this.

Unfortnately, I'm seeing the same disturbing trend as Edelman Senior Vice President Steve Rubel.

Some respected experts are advocating launching social media marketing programs solely for the purpose of influencing search engines, rather than with the intent of fostering collaboration and genuine communication.

This represents a clear and present danger to the fabric of the community. If you care about the social web, then you should be alarmed.

Search engine optimization (SEO) professionals of late seem poised to take over blogs, digg, StumbleUpon and other sites with a range of tactics, some legit, others more questionable with the intent of building Google Juice and nothing more.

Steve goes on to explain that if you're using blogs appropriately, high rankings will follow anyway.

To be clear, I do not object to the way that blogs, digg links and Wikipedia rank highly in search results. What does get me hot and bothered is when consultants and bloggers propose launching such an initiatives solely for influencing search. SEO, like word of mouth, should be a byproduct outcome, not a primary objective. Any brand that plays in this space should be aiming to create value. Do that and the other stuff will follow.

The vast majority of LexBlog's 300 plus blogs rank near the top of Google for their area of law. That's happening as a result of good blogging and proper blog site architecture, not because of SEO shenanigans.

SEO for bloggers : Free resource

Blog SEOSearch engine optimization expert Aaron Wall has just released a free resource entitled The Blogger's Guide to SEO. Not only does it have information on ranking well in the search engines, but as Brian Clark says it "does a great job of driving home why writing for people (instead of search robots) is more important than ever."