March 22, 2010 by Kevin O'Keefe

Ghostblogging will be the death of social media in the law

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Tags: , , ,
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
August 2, 2009 by Kevin O'Keefe

Is your law firm monitoring social media to avoid PR problems for your firm and clients?

Sarah Needleman reports in Monday's Wall Street Journal that big businesses are finding it critical to monitor social media as part of their public relations efforts.

A growing number of businesses are tracking social-media outlets such as Facebook and Twitter to gauge consumer sentiment and avert potential public-relations problems.

Ford Motor Co., PepsiCo Inc. and Southwest Airlines Co., among others, are deploying software and assigning employees to monitor Internet postings and blogs. They're also assigning senior leaders to craft corporate strategies for social media.

Shouldn't law firms being doing the same for matters about their firm and the matters in which their firm is representing clients? In this day and age when it's so easy to set up a dashboard via RSS feeds monitoring names, subjects, and sources it borders on negligence for law firms not to be doing so.

Not only do law firms need to monitor the likes of Facebook and Twitter, law firms need to respond quickly. Per corporate communications pro, Shel Holtz, "Social media [has] magnified the urgency of crisis communication, seemingly small incidents can quickly spread into bigger PR problems via the Web."

Scarier yet for law firms is not having all communications go through the law firm's traditional communication channels. Per Needleman:

Some companies are training staffers to broaden their social-media efforts. At Ford, Mr. Monty plans to soon begin teaching employees how to use sites like Twitter to represent the company and interact with consumers.

Coca-Cola Co. is preparing a similar effort, which initially will be limited to marketing, public affairs and legal staffers. Participants will be authorized to post to social media on Coke's behalf without checking with the company's PR staff, says Adam Brown, named Coke's first head of social media in March.

We've already seen how woefully unprepared law firms are for this type of monitoring and rapid response. Embarrassing emails from law firm management leak to blogs or main stream media. Virally passed across the Internet, without any response from the firm via social media, these things take on a life of their own.

I heard from one national law firm communications director that stories spreading across the Internet about senior partners thinking of leaving the firm, whether true or not, all but put the firm on a path leading to its demise.

For lawyers doing litigation, there's little question news and information about matters in dispute are going to be spread across Twitter and Facebook. A gag order is going do do little to quash discussion effecting the news, your bargaining position, and the views of a fact finder - judge or jury.

No one's got the perfect answer on how to monitor social media and how to respond yet. All we know is that not monitoring social media is a dangerous proposition and not responding in a timely fashion via the same social media is even more dangerous.

Tags: , , , ,
August 13, 2008 by Kevin O'Keefe

Newspapers cover murder trial via Twitter

Corporate communications pro, Shel Holtz, picked up news of something I thought we'd start seeing. Twittering of trials from the courtroom.

Three years ago a nationally publicized manhunt followed the discovery of three bodies in a North Idaho home. The search ended when a 8 year old girl was found at a Coeur D’Alene restaurant in the company of a convicted sex offender named Joseph Edward Duncan III. Shasta’s brother, Dylan, was found dead soon after at a remote campsite in Montana.

As Shel points out, while news of Duncan’s trial, which is just underway, isn’t grabbing national attention, the proceedings are of intense interest to those who live in Idaho and Eastern Washington, including Spokane. And riding the wave of new media tools, reporters from the Spokesman Review in Spokane and the Idaho Statesman are covering the trial via Twitter.

Sure, there will be full length stories in the next morning's papers written by the same reporters. But there's nothing like real time coverage.

Shel draws a big distinction between the manner in which the newspapers are using Twitter.

The Idaho daily is tweeting whenever there is new content on the newspaper's website, with a typical tweet looking like this:

image

These are jumbled up with all the other Statesman coverage, nearly all of which feature links to the full newspaper reports.

The Spokesman Review, on the other hand, is tweeting directly from the courtroom with no other coverage to interrupt the flow. Refreshing the view on the Review's Twitter page almost always reveals new information. Today's coverage so far (it's still mid-morning in Idaho) looks like this:

image

Access to the Spokesman Review's Twitter feed is highlighted on a page on the newspaper's website that provides an overview of the case, including a timeline, background, and an archive of coverage, multimedia, information on how to help the surviving victim, and PDFs of official legal documents. In addition to Twitter, the paper has also launched a blog, "featuring longer updates," according to the paper.

Also interesting to note that the Spokesman Review's Twitter feeds are acting as an AP feed to other newspapers and TV stations covering the trial. Twitter's page showing who is following the Spokesman Review's Twitter feeds includes The Oregonian, the Nashua Telegraph, NBC affiliate KHQ, Spokane's KREM TV, and Iowa's Quad Cities Times.

Tags: , , , , ,
May 18, 2008 by Kevin O'Keefe

Answering lawyer's 'no time' objection to blogging

PR expert, Shel Holtz, has good post today on answering the time objection to blogging.

Shel was addressing the time objection to executives blogging. I thought his explanation applied well to lawyers as well.

Blogs don’t replace phone calls, road shows, speeches, letters, email and the rest of the tools in the communications toolbox. When making the choice of tools to use, though, blogging should be assessed based on its strengths. Identifying the return on time invested an executive would accrue, that time commitment could seem like a far less daunting obstacle. Blogging, in fact, could ultimately take less time than using all the other channels that are less effective in some circumstances.

Finally, a lot of the worry about the time involved comes from a misconception: Blog posts from executives, many company leaders assume, need to be lengthy, carefully crafted essays, not unlike a shareholder’s letter or one of those ‘From the CEO’ columns that used to appear on the inside front cover of so many magazines. Truthfully, most readers of blogs aren’t interested in 2,000-word columns. A one- or two-paragraph observation, question, or commentary would be far more effective. ‘A radio report I heard in the car on the way to the office this morning got me thinking...’ is a fine introduction, and ‘I’d like to know what you think’ is a great conclusion to a brief, pithy post.

Rather than accept the ‘no time’ argument, let’s help our executives understand the value of blogging, the activities it can replace, and the nature of the effort involved.

I hear the time objection to lawyer blogging three or four times a week. Legal marketing professionals pushing law blogs for their law firms are running into the same objection. 'We're busy lawyers, we don't have time to blog.'

Shel's suggestion in responding is a good one. Help lawyers understand the value of blogging, the activities it can replace, and the how little effort may be involved.

Tags: ,