I was looking at an article on Kevin O’Keefe’s Lexblog entitled ” The Primary Reason For Lawyers To Blog Is Not To Advertise The Firm’s Web Site. It is a great article. It never ceases to amaze me how “BigLaw “or even medium to large law firms have no idea what it means to have a blog. They often can not distinguish between offering opinions related to what they do as a means of building a brand versus simply advertising what they do. There is a big difference. It is the difference between true word of mouth brand building and regurgitating crap available on legal aggregation sites or through a simple Google search. A new case comes down the pipeline, throw it on the blog. Just spoke at a legal seminar? Throw it on the blog. P.R department put out a nice press release on your big jury verdict? Throw it on the blog. Trying to generate business for a particular type of case you are after? “We do not want to be too obvious“. “We will create an “advertorial” Then what? Throw it on the blog. Promotion achieved through talking about what you have done will tend to only appeal to those who already know you. Promotion achieved by talking about what you think appeals to a much wider audience. If the audience likes what you have to say they will spread the word thereby building your brand. Most BigLaw firms do not seem to get it.
While some firms are getting on bus, the legal profession is still way behind. If it is a medium to large size firm forget it. They for the most part don’t have a clue. They don’t want to have a clue. Blogging is not politically correct and personal blogs are silently or openly discouraged. That is unless the attorney is writing about his/her workout at the gym or posting photos from their latest vacation trip. If you want to see true blogging in the legal profession you almost without exception have to go to solo practitioners or small firms. BigLaw firms want to protect what they have. From their perspective blogging can only cost them business. Small firms and solos want to go get what they don’t have and make and effort to understand what blogging can do to help that process.
If you want to talk to someone about the cost of Biglaw blogging inflexibility ask Denise Howell . Her blog Bag and Baggage is one of the more popular legal blogs. There is speculation over whether her blogging was a factor in her 2006 departure from Pittsburgh based law firm Reed Smith, an old guard, BigLaw firm. Has Reed Smith seen the error of its ways and come into the 21st century “blawgosphere” since this incident? A review of their web site shows press releases, attorney publications and “media resources”. The Big Law “media robotic playbook” run to perfection. I suspect the playbook for that firm has not changed since the internet was conceived. That’s their comfort zone. I do not know the age of the decision makers in this area at Reed Smith but I do not think that I am going out on a limb in speculating that the internet is more a part of their children’s lives than theirs.
Are their large firms who have true blogs. Sure, but they are hard to find. Do your own survey of large firm web sites. You wont find much. You will find firms that call something a blog. What they end up doing is regurgitating cases, talking about their courtroom victories and the last legal seminar an attorney spoke at.
These firms claim they want to be on the “cutting edge” and spend all this money to put a great looking site up. They then realize you can not blog and be completely neutral unless you are going to blog on what you had for breakfast, how your workout was etc. These firms become afraid of pissing potential or current clients off. They then revert back to regurgitating case law and re-posting legal articles.
If you are a law firm and unless you feel your audience is going to find what you had for breakfast interesting, blogging should mean expressing opinions and ideas. If your not going to do that, what’s the point. If that in fact is the point, do not be shocked when the only traffic you get to the site is from your current clients and your mailing list.
Comments
Powered by Facebook Comments










March 23rd, 2009 at 8:10 pm
The times are a changing. While studying business in San Francisco there was no talk of blogs or internet markets. My lawyer friends will be exposed to a different kind of forum for business.
March 23rd, 2009 at 8:50 pm
Insightful take on legal blogs and how big firms really don't have a clue or don't wanna know.
March 23rd, 2009 at 9:21 pm
LEgal firms have been clueless for a while, some had websites in 1996, some not so much.. a blog for a law firm? what so clients can subscribe to an RSS feed so they can know when a tax code changes, etc.???
that's too easy./.. lol.. good article.. and spot on.
March 24th, 2009 at 12:03 am
Thanks for sharing word of my post and your commentary Brian. You're right that most firms look at a blog as place to publish articles, email newsletters and alerts. Scarier yet is that they pay so called experts who tell them that is all a blog is.
I remain optimistic though. Though it's far less than 1/2 of law blogs, the number of lawyers who get blogging is increasing. So are the law blogs which are crap. But by highlighting the good ones and teaching the laggards we're making some progress.