Law firm epidemiology
Thursday, December 9, 2010 at 9:45AM If I had to make a prediction for 2011, I would say that social media use by law firms will continue to rise.
I'm sure that the ever increasing number of social media consultants, gurus and "ninjas" (yes seriously) will convince law firms that social media is the free and easy way to take their marketing to the next level. Somewhere in these pitch meetings the fateful word will almost certainly crop up:- "viral".
An interesting question to ask at this stage is when you last remember a story about a law firm "going viral"? It's difficult to define this, but fairly easy to spot in action - I follow a 1,000 or so people on Twitter and any story which really takes off will be tweeted and re-tweeted into my timeline to the point where it is difficult to miss.
There have been some. The infamous Claire Swire email is a good, if rather elderly, example (although that was in the days when the sharing was done mainly by email).
More recently the law firm stories which have created a buzz on Twitter have been more along the lines of the ACS:Law data leak and the coverage of Carter Ruck's attempt to use a super-injunction to block Parliamentary debate on the Trafigura affair.
You can argue that there is no such thing as bad publicity, but these aren't really the kind of stories which many firms would deliberately include in their social media strategy.
When was the last time you saw a positive story about a law firm (or any story which they were promoting themselves) gain any real traction on Twitter beyond a relatively small legal interest group? This isn't a rhetorical question - if any spring to mind then let me know.
The reality is that the stories which really do "go viral" are those which capture the public imagination... and this is rarely for reasons which the firm involved would like.
Embarrassing stories about oral sex? Allegations about infringements of civil liberties? These are the kind of stories people will read and re-tweet. The opening of your new office in Bracknell? Not so much.
You don't drive the social media agenda. A story is either interesting or it isn't and social media doesn't change that one iota. Unfortunately, the vast majority of law firm stories just aren't.
If anyone suggests that your press releases are somehow going to "go viral" because they are released using social media then it is time to end the meeting. They don't know what they are talking about.
Are there exceptions? There always are, but a good example is the infamous Ditch the Bitch campaign by Brookman solicitors featuring posters in the mens' (and ladies') washrooms of City bars. Classy? Probably not. Offensive? Possibly. Unfortunately in 2001 it was ahead of its time so far as social media is concerned, but today I'm pretty sure it would be all over Twitter.
The question is, how many law firms are really prepared to do something like this?
Reader Comments (2)
Hi Jon
To keep the legal theme going...the jury is still out for me on social media in law firms. Maybe as an internal comms tool...as an external one...I don't see that yet. Some are doing well with it...some...well lets just say the volume could come down a notch or two imo.
Problem is in my view that law firms (to use the iPhone analogy), are seeing the world in a v4.2 way when they have yet to reach v2.0. They have not evolved their strategy and have jumped onto a moving wagon and assumed that cos "thats the way everyone else is doing it, therefore thats how we need to do it."
The best things in life evolve.
I have as little interest in following (assuming they are not a friend or someone I am talking other stuff too), a solicitor, an accountant or a funeral director. And when they tweet me unannounced with some snake oil like 'hi'...oh I love that block button.
I wonder at times how much productivity is lost by lawyers searching timelines and tweeting (excluding you here). There are far better web based tools that can generate far more income...but is the problem that soc media is relatively easy to understand? So you can use social media as a safe harbour and not explore more complex but bigger return stuff. Plus everyone is talking about it so we need to saddle up...blah blah blah. Does anyone in a law firm go..."do we? Why?"
I am lucky. I have a specific, defined market, (lawyers) and a defined product that fits that market (in the main)...so social media is the bee's knee for me.
I also love the irony of lawyer social media gurus who say blog this and blog that (usually stuff lawyers, ie people who don't pay you, find interesting)...yet they never ever comment on blogs. What's that all about?
My predictions for 2011...more gurus, more conferences, more noise, more blocking.
2011-2012 prediction...the rise of the recognised and valued experts, who will have earned their medals and the crowd will be their marketing department.
I agree with Jon Busby. Am I right in thinking the last sentence is a recognition that social media will be working better in 2011-12? Rome wasn't built in a day.
Social media are just new channels of communication and demonstrably effective ones if used properly. As with all communications, nobody will listen for long if you don't have something interesting to say. (I don't subscribe to the view that you must be selling something.)
Twitter is an interesting phenomenon. You choose how far to open the tap. The messages are clearly signposted and easily skimmed. You drill down when you want to and as far as you want to. So your time is used as effectively as you choose. If Twitter was a serious timewaster it would not be as established as it is and something else would replace it. As a society we now have the technology for effective one-to-many communication. I can only see it being improved, not forgotten.
Of course, quality of communication is what counts. But I'll leave Common Sense, Grammar and Plain English for another day.