Social Media Networking and Marketing...is it truly the future for legal marketing?

Everywhere you turn, there is always a seminar stressing the importance of "Social Media Networking" or "Marketing". I personally have attended two this month alone. Each event, however never really seems to add anything particularly special to the information I already have. We have all heard the tips - join LinkedIN, get a blog (I suppose I followed this one!), Facebook, Twitter, etc., etc., etc. The issue I find with most of the tips I have received is that they never really effectively tell you how to use these tips to your advantage. One thing most seminars fail to take into account is the different personalities, styles and strengths of each individual blogger, tweeter, or facebooker and how that will affect their marketing style.

For instance, if you are not a writer by nature, a blog is probably not the best "marketing" tool for yourself. Twitter, which allows you to mini-blog, is probably the best way to go. It is easy to think of comments, post events you are attending or post a saying you just heard that can be made in 145 words or less. Its the quickest and simplest way to have a constant presence on the internet.

If your goal is to simply build an online professional profile, for me, LinkedIN works best because it allows me to display my accomplishments, accept recommendations and recommend colleagues. Basically, it allows you to toot your own horn without appearing arrogant! You can post messages on group boards and get information from more experienced attorneys. Of course you have to take each bit of advice with a grain of salt but you might find some of it really useful. One of the best things about this website is that your CV or resume is available 24 hours a day. Anyone that wants to know about your accomplishments, background or experience can find you and quickly determine if you are the attorney for them. It also allows you to link your blog as well as twitter account so that you have a constant stream of updates to keep you relevant on the net.

If you like to analyze different things, share your point of view ( I guess this would be me!) or just want to make your presence known, blogging may be the thing for you. You have endless choices for blogs and endless possibilities for topics. Whether you want to make it a fun discussion or a thorough analysis of a new law, blogging allows you to do this. You can discuss almost any topic you wish for free. There are blogging sites that costs, but to each their own.

If you like a lot of interaction with your colleagues and maybe clients, facebooking may be the way to go. You can create a Facebook Fan Page, such as mine and keep a constant log of events, discussions and topics of interest constantly going related to your practice area. You can always update people as to what you are doing and the services your firm (or business) provides. Personally, for me, I feel facebooking allows me to connect to colleagues and potentially future clients. With this option, however, you must make certain your personal Facebook page is private if you don't use it for professional reasons. My personal Facebook page does not allow non-friends to access it. Although I don't post anything that would be professionally inappropriate, I like the ability to keep at least part of my personal life private. As I have heard before, a lawyers personal life does not necessarily mean is their private. Everywhere we go, we are lawyers and must conduct ourselves as such.

In short, this has become my own little seminar of social networking. Obviously I haven't covered every type of social media available but these appear to be the most widely discussed modes of media marketing. Hopefully, I have shed a little light into your choice of marketing. The methods I have discussed above are all employed by myself, but tell me what works for you. Is there a social media outlet that has allowed you to grow your business or create your ideal internet presence?

Why do we go to law school?

Educators would have us believe that we attend law school to be taught to think like a lawyer. That we go to law school to be able to analyze facts and elements of the law. Yet most of us are admitted to law school because of the analytical skills we already possess. Even more interesting is that most of us exit law school failing to encompass the most basic and practical of legal skills. Unless we have clerked or taken a litigation course, many will exit law school not knowing the difference between a subpoena or summons! Most law schools do not have a practical skills requirement. Then how do we obtain such practical skills? We spend more money on seminars given by our representative State Bar Associations, County Bar Associations and Special Bar Associations to teach us how to "work" in the courts.

Isn't it ironic that as students, we spend tens of thousands of dollars to obtain a legal education, yet we leave law school unable to functionally practice.

Is Legal Outsourcing the Unauthorized Practice of Law?

In Business Law Today, a periodicial published by the ABA, David Steiger discusses the increasing trend of global legal outsourcing. A few years ago, the possibility of legal outsourcing did not appear to be a comprehensible task due to ethical, confidential and educational restrictions placed on the practice of law. However in the past few years, an entire industry based on American legal outsourcing has been growing in India and the Phillipines. This is not a simple company providing workers to read documents, but an industry that follows ABA guidelines within "secure" offices.

Although these companies currently provide document review services and legal research, how far can this industry go before they cross the line from assisting with legal tasks to the unauthorized practice of law. This question has been asked in regards to paralegals, which work under the supervision of attorneys, but what about those working without the supervision of an attorney 2000+ miles away.

The practice of law is a profession. As lawyers we are officers of the court and held to different standards. It is difficult to expect that individuals without the same training and educaton can be expected to uphold ethical standrads from which they suffer no consequence if they fail to abide be them. As paralegals or legal assistants, you are expected to adhere to the same ethical rules as attorneys. I know this from personal experience. Prior to entering Wayne State University Law School, I was a Legal Assisting Major at Eastern Michigan University. EMU's program was one of two ABA approved Bachelor Degree programs available in Michigan. My course work focused on the adherance to the ethical duties, timeliness and the same candor required of our superior attorneys.

As law clerks, just as paralegals, we learn there is a defined, but grey line of separation between the practice of law and the unauthorized practice of law. For instance, when is answering a question simply providing information or giving legal advice. In regards to document review, we can all agree that it does not take a law degree to read documents, but doesn't it take a law degree to legally analyze the meaning of the document? Where is the line drawn for the outsourced workers. How can you regulate an industry that has no duty to adhere to our professional standards. How can clients be assured that that they are acually paying legal services. I'm sure most clients, if asked, would not even agree to their confidential and sensitive matters being reviewed by non-attorneys or non-legal professionals in another country. It would be interesting to know just how many clients are aware of their outsourced records.

Why do we go to school for 7+ years to become attorneys if our tasks can be shipped overseas just as easily as a call center job? The line must be drawn somewhere . . . . but where?