Archive for the 'Blogging, Twittering, Etc.' Category

____________

1 December 2009

Sleazy

It’s time again to raise the issue of law firms that republish the works of others.

This time, it’s Finkelstein Newman Ferrara LLP — a small firm that publishes the ever-so-popular New York Real Estate Lawyer’s Blog (which now has an Alexa rank < 550,000). It’s a blog about lots of things; but it has little to do with New York real estate.

The latest post at the blog (“BLOOMBERG GIVES VINCENT SCHIRALDI PROBATION”) is a republished (and lightly edited) press release from Mayor Bloomberg.

A recent post (“Russia excited by new High Speed Rail; US system just around the bend”) is a republished post from the official blog of the U.S. Secretary of Transportation.

On and on it goes. Post after post (about ten per day) consists of nothing more than the contents of things already published by government officials or government agencies, except for some posts lifted from news sources like NBC.

Compare this post from the firm’s blog (“LAW PROFESSOR SUES OVER SQUATTER RIGHTS”) to this article (“‘Potty Parity’ Advocate Threatens Loo Suits”) published by NBC.

They’re identical!

Compare this post (“POLITICAL CORRECTNESS KILLED SOLIDERS”) to this article (“63% Say Political Correctness Kept Military From Preventing Ford Hood Massacre”) published by Rasmussen Reports, an “an electronic media company” that makes money “by selling advertising, title sponsorships, subscriptions, and content.”

They’re identical!

Finkelstein Newman Ferrara LLP claims rights to what it republishes (by adding a copyright notice to the republished material).

It advances the claim with this:

Please be advised that the views and opinions expressed on this website are exclusive to the identified author(s), whether or not such individual(s) may be affiliated with Finkelstein Newman Ferrara LLP. By making a submission, the identified author is deemed to have consented to its publication and release for use on our website and to the republication of such post or comment (and the use of the author’s name and/or likeness) in any fashion or form, electronic or otherwise, as the owner of this website may determine. Once accepted for publication, the submission shall become the property of Finkelstein Newman Ferrara LLP.

The identified author(s) is Lucas Ferrara, a partner at the firm.

So . . . when Mayor Bloomberg issues a press release and then Ferrara reissues it, it doesn’t contain the mayor’s views and opinions; it contains Ferrara’s.

Now . . . that is weird.

____________

18 October 2009

Blawgs — Anyone can have one; everyone can’t

Let’s discuss blogging, or — as some put it — blawgging: i.e., attorneys blogging about the law.

Let’s begin with Scott Greenfield’s latest post — “Blogging Is Alive, And Aggravating.”

If you’re an attorney and you’re thinking of starting a blawg, read Greenfield’s post. Heck . . . before you read that post, read these two posts by Mark Herrmann:

  1. The Life Expectancy Of A Legal Blog
  2. Blogging As A Business Development Tool

____________
Greenfield and Herrmann — regular blawggers with popular blawgs – emphasize how much work it is to maintain a blog.

Writes Greenfield:

Anyone can have a blawg. Everyone cannot. I’ve watched as friends in the blawgosphere faded away. I’ve watched as their enthusiasm waned, their efforts failed to bring in the eyeballs they hoped to gain. The sad truth is that the blogosphere is maturing before our eyes. It’s also a wondrous truth, as it’s separated the wheat from the chafe.

Notes Herrmann:

Legal blogs are like small businesses: Half of ‘em fail in the first year, and 90 percent of ‘em fail in the next five.

And both caution against expecting too much too soon from a blawg:

Greenfield:

If you think it’s the path to success in your law practice, you will be sorry and your blog will fail.

Herrmann:

They [blogs] require a ton of work; they gather readership only slowly over time; and they’re not the gold mine of new business that blogolaters say they are.

___________
Well done, blawgging can be quite the effort. Some blawgers come to hate the effort; others find that all they have to say’s been said, and then they move on to something else (another blog, perhaps).

Poorly done, blawgging is a matter of reposting news stories about a particular topic (e.g., DUI incidents).

Consider the Chicago DUI Lawyers blog.

Most of it (around 70%) consists of excerpts of copyrighted material (newspaper articles). Is this fair use? Does it matter that there are links to the articles? Does it matter that the publisher claims rights to the blog? Does it matter that the blog promotes a practice?

____________
Stay tuned! Tomorrow, we’ll discuss law firm newsletters and fair use.

____________

8 October 2009

Hide & Seek

Like so many others, you publish a blog to attract potential clients. And you make good use of terms to satisfy search engines so potential clients can find the blog. The blog is SEO savvy, and it attracts people searching for terms like bad faith, liability claims, insured’s claims, cause harm, and under the policy.

But . . . is it easy for the blog’s visitors to learn about your firm?

Suppose you were searching for information about a recent case, and you discovered the Policyholder Perspective blog. After you read some posts at the blog, you want to learn more about the firm that publishes it.

Now, how are you going to go from the blog to the firm’s Web site?

If you’re like most, you start by clicking the firm’s logotype at the top of the blog, but that doesn’t take you where you want to go.

Suppose you were using different terms to research another case, and you discovered the Financial Institution Law blog, or the Insurance Litigation & Regulatory Law blog, or the San Francisco Employment Law Firm blog.

And suppose you wanted to learn more about the firm that publishes that blog. You click the firm’s logotype at the top of the blog, and you’re taken where you want to go.

____________
If you’ve got a blog and a Web site, make sure it’s easy to get to the Web site from the blog. For the sake of visitors to the blog (esp. the potential clients among them), link your firm’s logotype at the top of the blog to your firm’s Web site. That’s how people expect things to work.

The best practice is to make your blog work the way visitors expect it to work. It’s not good practice to leave them guessing which link will take them where they want. That tends to drive visitors (including potential customers) away.

PS: If you’re responsible for your firm’s blog(s) and Web site, get familiar with Jakob Nielsen’s Web site. It’s a great resource for those concerned with user-interface design and usability.

____________

24 September 2009

Why Solo Attorneys Need Web Sites

The Wisconsin Law Journal has an interesting article (“Legal blog start-up soars to prominence”) that puts the spotlight on two attorneys: Aaron Street, publisher of Lawyerist Media LLC, and Samuel Glover, Editor-in-Chief of the popular legal blog lawyerist.com — a survival guide for lawyers.

The article describes how Lawyerist went from a one-man operation to one that now has a publisher, an editor-in-chief, and eight regular contributors: attorneys experienced in the management and marketing of small firms.

Here’s some good advice (“Marketing Malpractice Means Not Having a Website”) from Roy Ginsburg, “one of the most experienced attorney coaches in the country,” and a regular contributor to Lawerist:

If you’re a solo attorney and you don’t have a Web site, get one.

Why? Well, read Ginsburg’s article and see.

____________
Note: If you’re an attorney and you’ve got something to say (esp. about marketing or managing a small firm) consider being a guest blogger for Lawyerist.

____________

24 August 2009

What Can an Editor Do for an Attorney?

That’s our perpetual question. Here’s another answer to it.

Consider the following copy — the intro to an article titled “Letters of Credit May Not Last as Long as Expected” posted at the Banking & Finance Law Report blog:

Parties to a letter of credit following the Ninth Circuit’s opinion in Golden West Refining v. SunTrust Bank, 538 F.3d 1233 (9th Cir. 2008) may be surprised to learn some letters of credit are not necessarily “perpetual.”

Had a skilled and experienced editor touched it, it might have become this:

Following the Ninth Circuit’s opinion in Golden West Refining v. SunTrust Bank, 538 F.3d 1233 (9th Cir. 2008), not all “perpetual” letters of credit are truly perpetual.

____________
If writing can be considered thinking on paper (even if it can’t), then an attorney doesn’t want to show others he’s a careless writer.

Careless writing is a warning to potential clients.

____________

9 July 2009

To Blog, Or Golf?

More interesting reading from Mark Hermann – Blogging About Blogging:

Zach Lowe, over at AmLawDaily, did the kind of thing that reporters do: He called the managing partners of the high profits-per-partner firms and asked why they didn’t sponsor blogs. Jonathan Schiller, managing partner of Boies Schiller, was blunt:“I think the lawyers here are just too busy,” he says. “I’m too old to blog. I’d rather play golf if I have a bit of free time.”

It’s a shame that Zach didn’t ask the follow-up question: Does that go for all business development efforts, or just for blogging?

That is: “Jonathan, you’ve been solicited to write a by-lined piece in the Wall Street Journal. Do you accept, or shall we tell the Journal that you’d rather golf than write?” Or: “Jonathan, you’ve been invited to give the keynote address at the annual meeting of the Association of Corporate Counsel on Saturday morning. Do you accept, or will you be keeping your tee time?”

____________

11 June 2009

Providing Happiness to an Attorney

What I sometimes do is this — I spot an error, and then I bring it to the author’s attention.

Sometimes, the author appreciates it and even offers me $$$ to spot further errors so others (esp. prospective clients and future employers) never see them.

Angry faceSometimes, the author ‘cops an attitude’ and asks me who the heck I think I am.

I’m amazed when it occurs, but every blue moon, or so, an author responds with an X-rated diatribe (e.g., “How dare you use my work to promote your business, you lousy ^&&(#%#@&!”)

Sometimes, I use an error as the topic of a post. As I’ve explained over and over, I attribute the error to the author. (And, as you can imagine, I never use a client’s error as the topic of a post, because my clients are right smart — they have an editor who gets rid of any errors; so, prospective clients and future employers have no chance of seeing them.)

Why identify the author (and/or publisher)?

Well . . . in some cases, I’d have to do a lot of work to replicate the error. Consider, if you will, this annual report published by Weil Gotshal. It suffers a notable production error, which is that people can’t print the darned thing.

Now . . . I could recreate that annual report to illustrate the error (and leave Weil Gotshal out of it), but then readers would be left wondering, “Why is this guy making up these errors and then explaining how to correct them? That’s nuts!”

____________
Yesterday, an attorney — the author of an error I discussed in a post last month — discovered that that post appeared on the first page of results of a Google search of his name. This isn’t good, since he’s job hunting just now and fears a prospective employer will be alarmed by his poor mastery of English grammar.

He asked, “Can you please edit your post to eliminate reference to me or my blog?  Not sure that would ‘fix’ the Google issue at this point, but it would make me happy.”

I’m happy to oblige. The post is gone.

____________

1 June 2009

Can Twitter Improve Your Writing? (Part II)

Yesterday, I raised this question: is it true, as Josh Camson (host of the Social Media Law Student) claims and as H. Scott Leviant (host of The Complex Litigator) denies, that Twitter can make you a better legal writer?

I raised the question, and then I demonstrated some techniques for expressing yourself without exceeding Twitter’s 140-character limit.

Don't waste the judge's time

I’ve heard quite enough from you. What’s your point?

____________
I say “Yes. Learning to be clear and concise can make you a much more effective legal writer.” And that’s because of this simple rule: Time is Valuable.

The clerks and judges and attorneys who read what you write value their time, and they don’t like you to waste it, as when you give them 25 words when 12 would do just fine.

Whenever we can make 25 words do the work of 50, we halve the area in which looseness and disorganization can flourish.

– Wilson Follett, author of Follett’s Modern American Usage 

____________
Here’s a good exercise:

  1. Dig up some brief that you wrote a while ago.
  2. Open it in Microsoft Word, or any other editor.
  3. Copy one sentence.
  4. Record how many words it contains.
  5. Cut the sentence, as much as you can.

____________
Get in the habit of cutting as many words as you can from your next brief. Cut it as much as you can each time you review it. The fewer words you use to say what you need to say, the more effective you are.

I guarantee it.

Never use a long word when a diminutive one will do.

William Safire, recipient of the Presidential Medal of Freedom

____________
If you find it somewhere between impossible and all-too-difficult to cut any significant copy from your old briefs, consider Twittering. It’s an exercise that can help you acquire a very important skill, one you weren’t taught in law school — how to be brief and concise.

____________

31 May 2009

Can Twitter Improve Your Writing? (Part I)

First, spend a minute or two with Twitter, an on-line service that lets people write and publish short entries (for all the world to read).

An entry can be about anything (many use it to say what’s happening like “I’m getting ready for dinner,” or “the Mrs. awakes; she’s in a good mood; it’s gonna be a good day”) but it can be no more than 140 characters long: about 20 to 30 words.

Go ahead and write an entry. Write a response to Twitter’s essential question — “What are you doing?”

Here’s a fair response:

Right now, I’m reading an article that discusses whether Twitter can help turn you into a better writer. Actually, I’m reading two articles about Twitter.

Oops! You can’t publish that because it’s got 154 characters — 14 too many.

So, you start cutting.

Right now, I’m reading an article that discusses whether Twitter can help turn you into a better writer. Actually, I’m reading two articles about Twitter it.

And then you publish your 138-character message:

I’m reading an article that discusses whether Twitter can help turn you into a better writer. Actually, I’m reading two articles about it.

Now, suppose you want to say something more significant. Suppose you want to say you agree with the article that claims using Twitter (writing Tweets) can make you a better writer, and you disagree with the other article that says writing Tweets has no such benefit.

Then you must do more than cut; you must revise.

Right now, I’m reading an two articles that discusses whether Twitter can help turn you into a better writer. Actually, I’m reading two articles about Twitter.

With that revision, you have 29 characters to spare:

I’m reading two articles that discuss whether Twitter can help turn you into a better writer. I believe it can.

Let’s suppose you want to identify the two articles; you want to include links to those articles.

First, you shorten the links. You use an on-line service like TinyURL to turn:

http://www.thecomplexlitigator.com/post-data/2009/1/20/do-the-benefits-of-using-twitter-include-better-writing-for.html

into:

http://bit.ly/TTG6u

And you turn:

http://socialmedialawstudent.com/twitter/using-twitter-to-become-a-better-legal-writer/

into:

http://bit.ly/18wErp

You could further revise your entry like so:

I’m readingThese two articles that discuss whether Twitter can help turn you into be a better writer. I believe it can.

With that revision, you have 50 characters to spare:

These two articles discuss whether Twitter can help you be a better writer. It can.

Add the shortened links and some spaces, and you have a Twoosh, a 140-character Tweet:

http://bit.ly/18wErp        These two articles discuss whether Twitter can help you be a better writer. It can.        http://bit.ly/TTG6u

____________
More about how Twitter can improve your writing tomorrow.

Sources:

Using Twitter to Become a Better Legal Writer

Do the benefits of using Twitter include better writing for lawyers?  No.

____________

27 May 2009

Attorney Hates His Web Site

This post is really about another (“I Hate My Website,” written by New York personal injury attorney Eric Turkewitz). But, first . . .

____________
It’s the better part of a year ago, and I’m in a courtroom. (Not to worry; I’m sitting in the gallery.)

The judge looks like a million bucks. If Alan Shore appeared in her courtroom, he’d have a new goal in life — seduce justice!

Judge Weldon

The defense attorney looks so impressive. With his silver hair, golden cufflinks, and expensive garb, he looks as if he’s very experienced and successful.

But the prosecuting attorney doesn’t look so sharp. He sports a cheap, crumpled suit; he needs a haircut, and a new pair of shoes.

The case is about whether the accountant for a small business embezzled money from her employer.

I’m in the gallery with several dozens of others; we’re the jury pool.

The judge introduces the players — the accountant and her counsel, and the prosecutor.

In short order, the jurors form some impressions of the players.

____________
Have you ever heard of Thin Slicing? That’s our tendency “to find patterns in situations and behavior based on very narrow slices of experience.”

It’s a key factor in how we form “hunches, snap judgments, emotional reactions, and first impressions – in short, instant responses to sensations.”

It affects jurors. And it affects a potential client’s decision to select you, rather than another attorney.

____________
When it comes to getting into Harvard, winning an election, or promoting your firm, first impressions are key. Make a bad first impression on those who decide whether you get what you want or not, and you’re looking at an uphill battle. Make a good first impression, and the battle could be effortless.

Studies show that we begin to form our impressions of others before they’ve had a chance to say one word. We rely on non-verbal cues (demeanor, dress, etc.) to inform us first. According to those who study such things, we size others up in an instant; they say it has to do with evolution.

From the Handbook of Interpersonal Communications:

Evolutionary and biological imperatives probably required humans to develop the mental shortcuts, or heuristics, that encourage us to construct relatively complete judgments about objects from limited amounts of information. Whereas internal characteristics become more important when individuals are transforming impressions into relational knowledge, initial judgments rely upon readily accessible cues that make such judgments akin to viewing others as objects. This imparts primacy to visual nonverbal cues in initial interactions.

The Handbook also reminds us what we all (or should) know — first impressions can be lasting:

First impressions based on nonverbal cues tend to be highly persistent, even in the face of subsequent contradictory cues (Burgoon & Le Poire, 1993; Kenny et al., 1992). People are biased toward seeking information that confirms first impressions, and this serves to solidify and perpetuate those impressions.

“The researchers also believe that these quickly formed first impressions last because of what is known to psychologists as the “halo effect”.

If people believe a website looks good, then this positive quality will spread to other areas, such as the website’s content.”

____________
If you have a blog or Web site, potential clients (and, in some cases, jurists and jurors) aren’t so likely to form their first impressions of you based on your appearance or demeanor; they’re likely to form their first impressions from your blog or Web site. That’s what they see first.

And those first impressions don’t begin to form when they read what’s written at your site; they begin as soon as they see your site’s appearance. Before they read, they see, and then they develop some sense of what sort you are — smart, or stupid; sharp, or sloppy; trustworthy, or not.

In 1993, researchers put Thin Slicing to the test. They had college students watch 10-second, silent video clips of teachers giving lectures. Based on just those clips, the students were asked to rate the teachers on a wide range of characteristics: did the teachers seem attentive, supportive, optimistic, competent, confident, etc.

Those ratings were compared to end-of-course evaluations by students who had taken courses with those teachers, and there was a great correlation (0.76). And the correlation remained strong when the silent video clips were reduced to five seconds, and then two just seconds!

Ratings of 2.5-second clips of network newscasters’ facial expressions during the 1984 presidential elections showed that one newscaster had significantly more positive facial expression when talking about one of the candidates. Voters who regularly watched this newscaster were significantly more likely to vote for the candidate he favored.

Since then, further research has shown how powerful Thin Slicing is. In one experiment, subjects were asked to rate surgeons according to 20-second audio clips of the sounds of their voices. And guess what? A great correlation was found between how the subjects evaluated the surgeons’ voices and how often the surgeons had been sued for malpractice!

More recently, researchers have found that subjects formed their impressions of Web sites in just a tiny fraction of one second.

The way in which people move, talk, and gesture — their facial expressions, posture, and speech — all contribute to the formation of impressions about them. Many of the judgments we make about others in our everyday lives are based on cues from these expressive behaviors.

____________
Now, why does Eric Turkewitz hate his Web site? Because 1) in order to attract clients, he has to toot his own horn, even though he was taught not to, 2) in order to be noticed, he was to repeat key words over and over again, even though that ruins his prose, and 3) tooting his horn might not sit well with some jurors.

So the juxtaposition of these three elements — clients, search engine optimization and jurors — creates an unsolvable riddle for me. One possibility is to create a 2nd website, and have that swapped out with my real one when I am on trial so that jurors are not offended. But that doesn’t take care of the conflict between potential clients (where good writing is beneficial) and SEO (where poor writing is beneficial).

I’d like to end by saying that I’ve have solved this riddle. But I haven’t. Nor have I seen any other personal injury website solve it, even those written by “professionals.” Many of us do the same thing when it comes to our content, repeating the keywords for Google, listing past results and hoping that we can find a happy middle ground. Many of the sites appear to be oblivious to the potential for juror backlash.

If anyone does know the magic bullet — and it seems to me that this is a job for a copy editor not a marketer — I’d love to hear about it in the comments or on your own site. It must exist in some form.

Turk’s right — a copy editor can help an attorney write copy that satisfies search engines and prospective clients.

But a good designer — now that’s the bomb (as they say).

____________
For further information:

Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking
In this essay from the New Republic, Richard Posner of the 7th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals reviews Blink.
First Impressions Count for the Web, BBC

Snap Judgments Work!, by Harbour Fraser Hodder
first impressions, edited by Nalini Amaday, Ph.D., and John Skowronski, Ph.D.

Thin Slices of Expressive Behavior as Predictors of Interpersonal Consequences, by Nalini Amaday and Robert Rosenthal
Half a Minute: Predicting Teacher Evaluations from Thin Slices of Nonverbal Behavior and Physical Attractiveness, by Nalini Amaday and Robert Rosenthal
First Impressions Through Visual Web Design, by Luke Wroblewski
First Impressions Count in Website Design, by Andrew King of Website Optimization, LLC
Attention web designers: You have 50 milliseconds to make a good first impression!, by Gitte Lindgaard,  Gary Fernandes,  Cathy Dudek, and J. Brown
Tips for Search Engine Optimization, Google


Attorneys are Authors and Law Firms are Publishers