Unkempt Law Firms
Look! You wouldn’t want one of your attorneys showing up for an important client meeting with dirty fingernails. And you know exactly why.
Then why in the world would you publish a document that makes it seem as if you could care less about how your firm appears — and not just to one potential client, but to so many of them?
Consider the following excerpt from an article published by one well-known firm:
Not so easy to read, is it? That’s because there’s not enough contrast between the copy and the background.
Note: And when the article is printed on a black & white laser printer (e.g., you’re going to read it on the plane or on the train), it’s not readable at all. That, despite the fact that it could easily be set to print just fine (i.e., black type on a white background) on a typical printer.
An effective tool for making sure that foreground/background color combos offer good contrast (read legibility) is offered by the Web Accessibility Tools Consortium.
Use it. And consider this. A law firm that says it’s very knowledgeable about ADA compliance should show that it’s thinking of people with limited visibility, like color blind law school students using the Web to search for summer jobs.
This site will analyze your firm’s site to make sure that its “contrast is high enough for people with visual impairments.”
____________
Now, consider the following excerpt from a client alert published by another well-known firm:
Once again, the reader has to struggle.
I know what you’re thinking — all you have to do is zoom in on the copy, and it will be so easy to read, right? Wrong! The client alert is a GIF file, so zooming in on it just leads to this:
If you want your firm to appear sharp — like it’s the sort of firm that pays close attention to even the smallest detail — then make sure its publications look sharp.
____________
I suppose this is as good a place as any to note that very many of the largest, best-known firms don’t bother to review their own Web sites.
Lawyers don’t bother to review their firms’ sites to make sure the articles they’ve written look like they’re set in style. Managing partners don’t bother to make sure that their firms’ sites make a good impression, and that lack of concern has the power to leave potential clients with the impression that — despite what the firm says — it certainly doesn’t pay attention to detail (and the partners don’t review what their associates are doing).
A firm’s site can do the firm just as much harm as good. When potential clients review a firm’s site and see that the firm publishes documents that can’t be read, they’re not going to be favorably impressed.
Would you be impressed with a firm that doesn’t bother to review its own work?
10 May 2007 at 16:58
that makes it seem as if you could care less about
Ouch. A style guy ought to know the proper phrase is, “couldn’t care less.”
Think about it
10 May 2007 at 19:21
It’s an idiomatic expression.
For an explanation, see Bartleby.
11 May 2007 at 9:49
If you were being sarcastic, you might get away with that. But that wasn’t the way it was used. It’s one of the very few grammatic pet peeves that I have.
11 May 2007 at 10:11
At this point, I guess the best thing for me to say is this: “I could give a hoot!”