Yelp Ordered to Take Down Negative Online Review After Law Firm Wins Defamation Case: Yelp Fighting Back (with Lotsa Big Gun Help)

A negative online review is posted by unhappy client on Yelp.com.  The negative Yelp review discusses services provided by a lawyer and law firm. So the law firm files a lawsuit, arguing that the online review is derogatory and has hurt business. Sound familiar?

It should.  It happened two years ago here in Texas.  

For details, read "Texas Law Firm Sues Client Over Negative Online Review at Yelp.Com." It includes a link to their original petition, as filed in the Travis County District Court.  

California Court Orders Yelp to Remove Negative Review Held to be Defamatory

Different twist out on the West Coast, one that's getting lots of media coverage.  There, a California personal injury law firm filed suit seeking damages allegedly resulting from a negative online review. 

Difference here between the two suits?  The California case includes Yelp being ordered to take down the review.  

Spearheaded by plaintiffs' lawyer Dawn Hassell, the California law firm won at both the trial and appellate levels (admittedly easily done as the author of the online reviews failed to show up and "defaulted.")  

Hassell's victory?  That's big news right there.  But there's more.

California Appeals Court Agrees With Court Order  to Remove Negative Review

The California judge ordered Yelp to remove the defamatory online review from its site.  And the California appeals court affirmed his decision.  

Their reasoning?  Read the appellate opinion: Hassell v. Bird, No. A143233 (Cal. Ct. App. June 7, 2016).

Yelp was not ordered to pay monetary damages to the law firm.  (Doing so would arguably violate the California Communications Decency Act.)  

Big deal here:  Yelp was NOT a defendant in the California case.  The law firm didn't sue Yelp.  It came into the case after it was ordered to remove the review.  Anyone else thinking about a possible due process problem?  

Go into all the legal stuff with Eric Goldman on his blog.  

Read Yelp's Petition for Review to the California Supreme Court.

California Supreme Court Reviewing Case; Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft Write to the Court

Bigger news.  The "friends of the court" that are entering the arena.  

It's reported that powerhouses including Facebook, Twitter, and Microsoft have written to the California Supreme Court.  This is fine; it's called acting as a "friend of the court," or "amicus curaie." 

Their letter warns Hassell's victory, if not reversed, will endanger free speech and otherwise do bad things.  

Among others filing before the California Supreme Court wanting a reversal:

• Public Citizen - read their amicus curaie filing here;
• Reporters' Committee for Freedom of the Press - read their amicus here;
• RStreet - read their amicus filing here; and
• Bunch of Law Professors (letter by Professor Eugene Volokh) - read their letter here, as published by the Washington Post in Volokh's article dated August 19, 2016, that has some helpful background information. 

Docket Information on Hassell v. Bird

Interested in what happens?  The California Supreme Court Docket for Case S235968, styled Hassell v. Bird, is online and upon request, notices of new developments will be emailed to you. 

• On September 21, 2016, the California Supreme Court granted writ.

Write About What You Know -- It's Good Advice, Especially for Lawyers Writing Blog Posts

Whether or not Mark Twain advised us to "write what you know" is debatable, but it's considered good advice by many and you've probably heard the quote and considered its lesson.  (I first heard it as advice given to me by poet Naomi Shihab Nye in an early writing class.)

Those who disagree argue that it's exactly what writers shouldn't do -- instead, they should use their imaginations and creativity to write about what they don't know.  They've got a point.  Maybe it is a bit confining for the fiction writer: how could we have Star Trek or Narnia if writers were kept to writing about only the things of which they know?  However, it is particularly wise counsel when the writer is an attorney who is publishing content online for his or her peers, clients, and potential clients to read and consider.

"Write what you know" has been attributed to Mark Twain.

The Temptation to Write About The Unknown in Law Blogs

Law firms who have blogs for legal marketing purposes are always concerned with how their blawg is going to help the firm make rain.  Some track their analytics to see how many times a particular post link has been clicked; others monitor how often the blog has spurred someone to call the firm for more information or maybe even to set up an appointment.

ROI (return on investment) is important to judge.  True enough.

Thing is, if your blog is working for you as a marketing tool then there's always the temptation to boost what you are doing to get more traffic or more potential clients.  To expand your firm's practice or practice areas using the blog.

Conversely, if the law firm's marketing efforts aren't working and business is stagnant, then the firm may be considering new practice areas as a way to boost business.  Writing blog posts discussing that new area of the law may be one of the first toes they put in the water as they segue the practice .  

There's also the reality that after awhile, the blogger runs dry on things to discuss and is searching for ideas and themes for new blog posts.  Maybe new practice area issues or blog themes will be easier to write.

My suggestion:  please don't decide to write posts discussing a new and untried practice area.  It's one thing for a savvy personal injury lawyer, for instance, to decide to focus efforts on a new type of PI theme, like delving into the product liability area.   It's another thing for that personal injury lawyer to decide to market in criminal law just because he (or she) thinks that criminal trials would be exciting, different, fun, or profitable.

Here's why.
.

Write About What You (or Your Law Firm) Knows

Most blogs aren't taken as seriously as more traditional publications, like your Bar Journal monthly magazine, or even blogs like HuffPo.  Your reader is going to be taking your post seriously, however.  And so will your State Bar should they decide to review your stuff.

It's just smart to write about the practice areas you know and within which you have experience.  If you are an injury lawyer or law firm who would like to venture into criminal law, great!  Go get that CLE and learn your criminal rules of procedure and insure that you are competent to practice criminal law before you start writing posts on your professional law blog about criminal law issues.

Moreover, if you're a personal injury lawyer who writes a blog post (or a series of posts) about criminal law matters, then you are putting yourself out to the public as a criminal attorney just as if you were to buy advertising on a local radio station or an advertisement in the telephone directory.  There are ethical considerations here (and disciplinary rules) that need to be considered when lawyers are blogging.

Bottom line, if you are a lawyer writing about a legal issue on a law firm blog, either have a personal professional depth in that topic via education and/or experience, or may sure to quote your law firm expert who practices in that area as part of your coverage of the topic.  Don't be what my Uncle Billy would call "a man with a hat and no cattle."  It can get you in trouble with readers, potential clients, and the disciplinary authorities.  
.
.

RebelMouse Review: What is RebelMouse, Anyway? Is RebelMouse Worth My Time - or Yours?

A notice hit my Gmail inbox today: BisnarChase, a California personal injury law firm, has joined RebelMouse.

Now, I recall joining RebelMouse, too, several months ago. And I’ve never gone back to the RebelMouse since then.

RebelMouse is a Social Media Aggregator.

 However, this notice made me think I might want to give RebelMouse another looksie, so today I went over to RebelMouse and looked at my RebelMouse page.

This afternoon, I added my Pinterest feed to RebelMouse as well as my LinkedIn feed. (I had originally added only Google+ and Twitter). I added my blog feeds, too.

What does this mean? RebelMouse Collects Your Social Media Stuff

It means that when you go to my page on RebelMouse, you will see a nice display of all the things that I’ve added recently on all these sites: my pins, my tweets, my G+ posts, my LinkedIn updates.

Which seems like a nice thing to have all in one place, I suppose. I get why it's being described as a "social aggregator."

Yes, I can go to other RebelMouse pages and see what someone else (or something else - like HuffPo) is posting on these various social media pages - but will I?

Posting on RebelMouse - It's a blog, too?

RebelMouse also offers the opportunity to post on RebelMouse. So I did. And I shared that RebelMouse post on Google+ using the RebelMouse share feature.

However, I’m not sure what I’m suppose to get from RebelMouse. It’s easier for me to post on Google+ and have that post automatically appear on RebelMouse than vice versa (I had to enter new text for the shared post to G+ from RebelMouse).

Also, there’s not an option to share to LinkedIn from RebelMouse, a decided disadvantage but understandable given LinkedIn’s reclusiveness, social-media wise.

Will I return to RebelMouse?  That’s a big question.  I'm not tempted to do this; there is no siren's song akin to Pinterest.

I’m going to play around with RebelMouse for a couple of days or so. However, I’m not breathless with anticipation of a Great New Find here.

Maybe I’ll learn more this week to change my mind. I’ll keep you posted.

Here’s what RebelMouse explains about itself:

RebelMouse organizes your social presence into a beautiful, dynamic and social site -- in seconds. It's based on the idea that people are proud of what they share on social networks, but are starting to feel embarrassed about their websites. RebelMouse is your social front page and automatically updates as you post on social networks as well as when you blog directly on your site.

Can LinkedIn Get Lawyers In Trouble With Their State Bar? Maybe

LinkedIn provides a great service for professionals, and lots of lawyers are members of the online site.  However, given the prohibitions placed upon attorneys by their respective bars and supervising authorities over marketing, solicitation, maintaining the appearance of propriety, etc., there's been a lot of discussion over how attorneys can be active on LinkedIn without getting in trouble with their State Bar Associations or State Supreme Courts.

Skills and Expertise in LinkedIn Bios - Careful About Those Practice Areas

Consider the recent Florida Bar Association advisory opinion on LinkedIn's profiles.  It is the opinion of the Florida regulatory authority that Florida lawyers should not list his or her practice areas under the "Skills and Expertise" section of their LinkedIn bio unless they have achieved Board Certification.

For those who follow LinkedIn regularly, this may seem a little over the top.  Still, Florida lawyers -- know that you cannot list your practices in the Skills and Expertise section until something changes with the Florida Bar.

And that's not all.

Endorsements?  Uninvited LinkedIn Endorsements May Not Meet State Bar Approval, Either.

You've seen all those endorsements that pop up for you?  People you know well or barely at all, endorsing you for all sorts of things?

Well, if those endorsements involve legal areas, then take heed.  Maybe these will get you in trouble with your State Bar, too, even though you have had zip to do with being endorsed.  These are uninvited surprises to LinkedIn members as other people take the step to endorse them for something.  It's not done by the lawyer.

From the Bar's perspective, these endorsements may be in violation of Bar Rules.  Florida may find them to be in violation of the same Ethics Rule that bars the above Skills and Expertise listing of practice areas:  in Florida, it may be that these endorsements can only be legally placed on an attorney's LinkedIn page if that Florida lawyer is Board Certified in that area.  

Illinois, according to opinions given in the Illinois Bar Association, finds that LinkedIn endorsements for Illinois lawyers is okay with the Illinois Bar.

For more on the Florida endorsement issue, go here for local lawyers' take on things and go here to read Robert Ambrogi's discussion of the situation.

Yelp Online Review Site Sues California Lawyer for Fake Reviews

Yelp.com has sued a California law firm for allegedly fake reviews posted on the review site - read the details in a news story published in Bloomberg Businessweek which includes a link to the complaint that has been filed in the California court.

The defendants here are McMillan Law Group, Inc., and Julian McMillan, who practices bankruptcy in San Diego, California.

The twist to this story:  McMillan sued Yelp.com earlier this year - and won.  Yelp successfully appealed that decision according to the Business Insider and now, Yelp has sued the lawyer in another lawsuit.

There's more coverage with more details, if you're interested:   the Wall Street Journal has blogged about it; and ArsTechnica.com reports that the Yelp case has been ordered to binding arbitration.

What I find interesting about all this is that: (1) apparently, Yelp has yet to make a profit on its review site, where revenues come in from advertising; and (2) allegedly, lawyers are not only getting friends and family and employees to write sweet and wonderful reviews for their Yelp profits but lawyers are also purportedly grouping together, so that firms can submit glowing reviews about each other's practices on Yelp.com, too (this all, according to Yelp).

Two things:

1.  If Yelp isn't turning a profit, then how long can it survive?  Just wondering here.
2.  I realize that lawyers come in all shapes and sizes, but asking Aunt Harriet to write a fake Yelp review, or forming some secret review society to chock the site with fake reviews for the group?  Sure, I'm jaded enough to think that there may be some lawyers out there doing this.  I just don't know any lawyer that would bother.  They don't have enough hours in the day as it is.   And I mean, really.  

Great Infographic on B2B Social Media (Notice How Google+ Is Exploding)

The State of B2B Social Media infographic courtesy of Visual.ly

Is Your Marketing Newsletter In Compliance With Federal Law? FTC Regulates Commercial Newsletters: Fines If You Don't Comply with CAN-SPAM Act

Have you heard of the Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing (“CAN-SPAM”) Act?

If you’re sending out newsletters via email for marketing purposes, then you may want to insure that you (or your firm) are in compliance with this federal law designed to curtail unwelcome spam messages. 

Together with the Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), the CAN-SPAM Act works to protect all of us from unwelcome and uninvited messages in our email inboxes or in text messages on our cell phone. 

They’ve been on the books since 2003 and they’re enforced by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). These federal laws regulate ALL commercial messages sent via email or text message; therefore, any marketing campaign that includes email newsletters or text campaigns must be in compliance with these federal laws.

1. Is your communication a “commercial electronic mail message” as defined by the Act? 

From the CAN-SPAM Act: 

• The term "commercial electronic mail message" means any electronic mail message the primary purpose of which is the commercial advertisement or promotion of a commercial product or service (including content on an Internet website operated for a commercial purpose). 
• The inclusion of a reference to a commercial entity or a link to the website of a commercial entity in an electronic mail message does not, by itself, cause such message to be treated as a commercial electronic mail message for purposes of this chapter if the contents or circumstances of the message indicate a primary purpose other than commercial advertisement or promotion of a commercial product or service. 
• Except as provided in subparagraph (B), the term “sender”, when used with respect to a commercial electronic mail message, means a person who initiates such a message and whose product, service, or Internet web site is advertised or promoted by the message. 
• (B) Separate lines of business or divisions: [i]f an entity operates through separate lines of business or divisions and holds itself out to the recipient throughout the message as that particular line of business or division rather than as the entity of which such line of business or division is a part, then the line of business or the division shall be treated as the sender of such message for purposes of this chapter. 

In essence, the federal law requires the reader of your newsletter or series of emails to consent to these messages being sent to their inbox if the messages meet the definition of “commercial electronic mail message.”

2. Need for Consent from the Recipient for Commercial Email Messages 

The FTC has rules in place that require written consent for text messages to a phone; for email inboxes, the consent can be oral or written (say, in an email message subscribing to the messages or newsletter) if the message meets the definition of “commercial electronic mail message.”

 Your Newsletter Needs to Meet Requirements under Federal Law 

 The Small Business Administration (SBA) recognizes the power of email marketing on its website; it quotes Pingdom research for a Return on Investment of $44.25 for every $1.00 spent on email marketing in 2011. 

A ROI of $44 to $1 means that newsletters work: therefore, the goal is not to back away from email marketing but instead to make sure that the newsletter comports with federal guidelines.

To that end, the SBA provides details and suggestions on how to take advantage of the benefits of this marketing tool without falling afoul of the federal laws and regulations.

Read more from the SBA here.

And remember: the FTC does enforce this and does fine companies it determines to be in violation of these laws. Here’s a helpful video from the FTC on this issue:

Commercial Speech vs Political Speech and the Law Firm's Blog - Is Your Blawg Protected Free Speech or Not? What Would Your State Bar Answer Here?

Free speech isn't without its limitations, lawyers know this, and when it comes to "commercial speech" the United States Supreme Court has been happy to allow limitations on the free speech of attorneys and law firms when "commercial speech" is involved.  Lawyers don't like being regulated, however, and there are attorneys blogging today who may think that their blog (blawg) isn't subject to state bar review when in fact, it is.  Those bloggers (blawgers) are at risk of bar discipline.

Free speech protections provided by the federal constitution are not as broad for commercial speech as they are for other forms of free speech.  Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Comm'n of New York, 447 U. S. 557 (1980); Virginia Pharmacy Board v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc., 425 U. S. 748 (1976).  Advertisements are subject to governmental regulation.

This distinction between different kinds of speech is very important for lawyers who write blogs to remember.

Consider, for example, the concerns of the High Court in Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977) where things like (1) the adverse effect on professionalism; (2) the inherently misleading nature of attorney advertising; (3) the adverse effect on the administration of justice; (4) the undesirable economic effects of advertising; (5) the adverse effect of advertising on the quality of service; and (6) the difficulties of enforcement were determined to be sound bases for regulating attorney advertising even though "advertising by attorneys may not be subjected to blanket suppression."  Bates, 433 U.S. at 368- 379, 383.

Of course, the Bates opinion came down long before blogs popped up everywhere.  Lawyer blogs are tricky things.  There are firm-blogs, and individual lawyer blogs.  Ones written for specific practice areas (e.g., appellate, real estate, or environmental law) are popular these days.  You will find some blogs attached to law firm web sites (where they may be tools to boost the search result rankings of the firm's site) or you may find blogs as stand-alone publications (where they have their own separate domain).

Blogs and Free Speech:  Commercial vs Political Speech

Twisted into all this complexity of law blogs ("blawgs") are the legal protections afforded to the particular blog under constitutional free speech protections.  Not all blogs (blawgs) are the same, and not all blogs will be policed in the same way.

Commercial speech in a blog will allow the Bar to regulate and police that publication, just as the Bar regulates advertisements in the Yellow Pages, on the television screen, or in a standard firm web site.

If the blog basically serves an advertising purpose, then the state bar association that has jurisdiction over the lawyer or law firm responsible for that blog will argue it has a right to regulate that blog.  Period.

When does a blog not have to conform to Bar regulation?  When the blog publishes content that is protected as political free speech.

Political free speech isn't trying to sell the reader on hiring the lawyer or the law firm.  Political speech essentially involves any “... interactive communication concerning political change.” Meyer v. Grant, 486 U.S. 414 (1988).  It's not trying to sell the reader on paying the author of the content for the author's goods or services, in other words.

What happens if there's a mishmash of the two within the blog?

Blogs published by lawyers may offer political speech, but all too often they are intertwined with commercial speech -- especially if the blog is attached to the firm web site.  Whether or not the speech will be given free speech protection isn't as easy of a question to answer.

If one of the motivations for the blog is marketing the lawyer or law firm but it's not the only reason for the blog's publication, then what?

In Bolger v.Youngs Drug Products Corp., 463 U.S. 60 (1983),  the problem of mixed commercial and political speech in advertising was addressed.  Lawyers cannot use political free speech posts to protect themselves from regulation:

Advertisers should not be permitted to immunize false or misleading product information from government regulation simply by including references to public issues.

Bolger, 463 U.S. at 68.

If the blog combines commercial speech with political speech, then it will not automatically achieve the constitutional protections that a blog devoted solely to political speech will have.  Nevertheless, that combination of commercial speech with political speech may still rise to that level of constitutional protection if certain characteristics exist.  See, Bigelow v. Virginia, 421 U.S. 809, 818 (1975); Board of Trustees of the State University of New York v. Fox, 492 U.S. 469, 474 (1989).

According to other precedent, we have a test:

....For commercial speech to come within that provision, it at least must concern lawful activity and not be misleading. Next, we ask whether the asserted governmental interest is substantial. If both inquiries yield positive answers, we must determine whether the regulation directly advances the governmental interest asserted, and whether it is not more extensive than is necessary to serve that interest. Central Hudson Gas & Elec. Corp. v. Public Serv. Comm'n, 447 U.S. 557, 566 (1980); Adams Outdoor Advertising v. City of Newport News, 236 Va. 370, 383, 373 S.E.2d 917, 923 (1988).

Whether or not the reader may be misled means looking at the unsophisticated reader (Bates) and the assumption is going to fall in favor of the potential that someone out there reading the blog posts may be misled -- think Jethro Bodine as your potential reader when you're evaluating your publications.

The Bar Is Focused on Lawyers Misleading their Readers

The reason for bar regulation of lawyer advertising is to protect the public from being manipulated by lawyers marketing themselves in various formats: newspapers, television commercials, internet marketing, etc.  It's true that there's a profit motive in lots of web sites that enjoy protected free speech: the local newspaper's web site, for example, is published by a company operating for a profit and yet its site content is under the First Amendment free speech umbrella.

State bars, however, are going to come down on the side of regulation of the site or blog.  Consider your blog content and the design carefully.

Ask yourself this:

Would Jethro Bodine think you're selling yourself to him, even if your posts are careful not to market your practice or your firm directly?  Does having your blog attached to your law firm web site suggest that the blog is a commercial tool to get him to call the firm for a free initial consultation?  Does the design itself suggest commercial intent with things like 1-800 numbers in huge fontfaces in headings, footers, or margins?

If so, then you need to make sure that your blog (blawg) conforms to your state's advertising requirements (disclaimers, etc.) even if the majority of your content is political in nature.

Yelp Review Gets Reviewer Sued by Company Claiming Significant Damage From Single, Bad Online Review: Is This The Case That Sets the Precedent for Internet Defamation Suits Based on Bad Online Reviews?

If this isn't the start of a trend, I don't know what is.  There's a sizable case over on the East Coast that seems to be holding its traction against the usual arguments of free speech in a case where defamation damages are being claimed based upon an online review.  I think that lots of lawyers are going to be watching what happens here.

(It's not that these bad reviews haven't been the subject of lawsuits filed by lawyers already:  there's a Dallas law firm that has filed a $50,000 damage suit for a bad review on Google ("Ben Doe") and there's a Florida lawyer who sued for removal of a bad online review at a lawyer-review site and had the case settled pretty quickly.)

Why?  I've already had more than one discussion with clients in different parts of the country that are angry and fretful about the opportunity offered to anyone out there to write a bad review of their work and have it published for all to see at Yelp or Avvo or whereever.  There are lots and lots of review sites these days.

The calls that I've had regarding bad reviews are from lawyers in firms that practice in emotional areas: family law, criminal defense, etc. where someone is going to be upset.  It's almost an old joke that no one likes their ex-spouse's divorce lawyer.  

Most of my law firm clientele are concerned with how to deal with snarly reviews at these online sites, when they are prohibited or limited in publishing client testimonials from clients that are very pleased with the work the lawyers have done.  They aren't so concerned with the single bad review as their perceived inability to balance that bad review out with the numerous client letters, cards, and testimonials that they have on file where clients offered stellar reviews of the firm and its work.

It isn't fair, granted.  However, no one has brought up the idea of suing the bad reviewer.  Yet.  I'm thinking that those lawsuits may be coming.  Consider this.

The $750,000 Internet Defamation Lawsuit Out of Virginia

Dietz Development is a small District of Columbia business owned by Christopher Dietz that Fairfax, Virginia resident Jane Perez contracted to do some work on her home last February.  Seems Mr. Dietz and Ms.Perez are acquainted because they went to high school together, and that's why Dietz Development got the call.

Now, these two ex-students and former friends are on opposite sites of a defamation suit that is getting international attention (like this article in Great Britain's Daily Mail).  Dietz Development is alleging a loss of $750,000 in lost profits and damage to the company's reputation (or business goodwill) because of one, single bad review posted on the Yelp site.

Read the complaint here (provided by The Washington Post).  The Yelp review appears as Exhibit B (second post on page).

There was a similar review posted to membership review site Angie's List, which has been included in the complaint (see Exhibit A) but isn't getting the spotlight that the Yelp review has garnered, perhaps because the readers of Angie's List are not the general public but only those who pay a membership fee to access the Angie's List web site.

Judge Grants Restraining Order: Reviewer Must Edit The Online Review as Case Proceeds

This week, a judge granted Dietz's motion for a temporary order requiring Jane Perez to change the online review although the order does not require that the bad review be taken offline in its entirety.  (Whether this is drawing a line on potential damages claims or giving the plaintiff a big hint that he's going to win this thing is too soon to tell.)

Media reports are that Perez has been ordered to remove her allegations that Mr. Dietz stole jewelry from her home.  I haven't been able to find the actual court order online (yet).

What Was in the Yelp Review That Got Jane Perez Sued?

The lawsuit alleges that not only did the review complain about the quality of the work that was done, or not done, it also claims that Mr. Dietz stole jewelry from the home (theory: he was the only one with a key to the house aside from the home owner at the time that the jewelry went missing) and that Dietz was operating without the proper license to do business.

Of course, Mr. Dietz posted his own reply to her bad review.  He's arguing that wasn't enough.  From this single bad review, the plaintiff is claiming a huge amount of damage ($750,000).

And this case is proceeding through the courts. It's not being tossed.  And the judge just made the review edit the review.  

In my opinion, online reviews of businesses -- including law firms -- are going to be considered in a different manner than book reviews (where book reviewers are also facing the risk of being sued for a bad review).

These online business reviews may be able to hurt a business more than a single bad book review, also my opinion here.  After all, a book review is understood to be the opinion of a work of fiction or non-fiction and the reader understands that what is poison to one may be meat to another.  It's subjective.

An online review of a service provider, on the other hand, can be objectively judged.  Was the work shoddy or not?  Expert opinion and factual support can provide an answer.  Was there a theft?  Who did it?  These are things that can be proven with facts in a courtroom.  Same thing with the licensure issue.  Maybe this is true for damages sustained from a bad review, as well.

Will more businesses sue for bad online reviews?  Will law firms tee it up?  I think so.

And where are the publishers in all this?  They sure are quiet and I'm wondering if that's smart.  

Here's my first big question: where is the responsibility of the publisher in these online review defamation cases?  I'm wondering if the online web site that profits by building a review directory for the public isn't going to be held by a judge somewhere to have a corresponding duty regarding the reviews that are placed upon its site pages.

Surely there are going to be plaintiffs that include these sites in their pleadings; after all, these are probably deeper pockets than the individual reviewer.  My little voice is asking, "if someone claims a criminal act like theft, then isn't that stepping across some sort of publisher duty line in an online review of a business?"

Another big question I have: what does this do to trustworthy reviews?  Free speech is important and it's priceless in its value.  Something that we may learn once it's gone (like privacy rights) in the near future.

I do read online reviews before making a purchase or inviting someone into my home for repairs.  Will these suits simply insure that the bad reviews won't get published out of fear of reprisal and I won't be able to learn that the book or the plumber or the car is a bad deal?

If this litigation happens, then what's the value of the review site to me?  Why bother reading CitiSearch for a restaurant to check out if all that CitiSearch can offer me is fluff stuff?

LinkedIn Company Pages and More: Committing to More Time and Effort on LinkedIn in 2013

LinkedIn is coming up in more and more conversations that I'm having with clients and over this Thanksgiving holiday weekend, LinkedIn actually popped up in a chat or two among friends - seems that more and more business folk are interested in learning more about LinkedIn.

Most everyone at this point considers LinkedIn as more than a site used by people looking for a job or those looking to hire.  (Not that there's anything wrong with that, right?)  Most everyone is also confused about what LinkedIn can do for them, and absolutely everyone that I have been chewing the fat with over LinkedIn is wary of the amount of time that needs to be invested into LinkedIn before results are seen.

Still, LinkedIn is a surprisingly hot topic here on the Planet Reba: people are pondering doing more on that site, it's just a question of what they will do and how much time it will require.

Of course, this is exactly what LinkedIn is working hard to achieve: just read a post or two at the LinkedIn blog and you'll catch the drift about LinkedIn's plans for the future.  (Maybe it's not world domination, but I wouldn't discount the possibility.)

Should LinkedIn be a part of your future?  I think so.  I know that I plan on LinkedIn having more of a presence in my 2013 Schedule than ever before.  How?  Why?

I'll explore this in more detail in future posts; however, right now there is something that I think is worth noting now and worth your time to consider implementing on the LinkedIn networking site: it's their new company pages.

LinkedIn Company Pages

LinkedIn made their redesigned company pages available to everyone last month.  LinkedIn has a nice set of pages to acquaint members with this new offering, as well:

• Overview of LinkedIn Re-Designed Company Pages
• Connecting:  How to Find and Follow Other Companies on LinkedIn
• How To Set Up Your Own LinkedIn Company Page
• Money, Honey:  Set Up Products and Services on Your Company Page
• Easy Peasy Status Updates to Your Company Page

And there's more.  There's a widget so you can place a "follow" button for your LinkedIn Company page on your company's web site or blog.  There's a nice FAQ section.

Best for last:  LinkedIn also has everything here packaged in a set of instructional videos to make things even easier and more inviting to you.

And, yes -- it's all free.  Free.  (Take that, Facebook.)

Want to learn more about this?  Check out this downloadable pdf from LinkedIn for those who would rather print something and read it instead of looking at a screen.  (Dinosaurs do still roam the earth.)  Also check out their case histories of companies who are happy with the results they've experienced with their LinkedIn company pages.

On-Page versus Off-Page Search Engine Optimization: What's the Difference?

On Page SEO, short version, involves all the words that you can see on your web site's pages.  How this content is optimized for the search engines is just one component of effective SEO.  Here is where key words and key phrases get put to good use.  Captions, headlines, paragraphs, footers, disclaimers, etc. are all a part of On Page SEO. 


Off Page SEO, succinctly, is everything else.  Some of the off page factors include: linkage on the site, both internal links and external linkage; writing the text of internal links themselves; building site popularity through tweeting, commenting on forums and blogs, press releases, submitting to directories, etc.

There's a lot that goes into search engine optimization - and there's lots of stuff out there on the web for you to read about SEO, if you're interested.  (Read Google's SEO overview here.) There's also lots of people out there claiming to know all about SEO.  Maybe they do, maybe they don't.  Ask for examples of their accomplishments before you pay them anything.

Meanwhile, consider this.  The purpose behind optimizing content is to get your content noticed and highly ranked in search results on its themes or topics by the search engines.  Which for most folk mainly means Google.  You're competing with other content to get into the top spots.

Google is in the business of competing with other search engines to provide the more informative and on-target results to its reader's search requests.  If Yahoo could give you better results (and you should compare them often -- Yahoo gives better locator information IMHO, for example) then you'll switch to Yahoo, right?

It's really not rocket science.  Write the best content possible for your topic.  Think of your reader, and help them here.  Give them your expertise.  Give them links.  Give them information in easy to follow language. 

Help Google beat its competition, in other words.  Do this, and do this well, and you've achieve your SEO goals automatically. 

Books on Your Blog or WebSite: PDF or eBook? Why You Should Choose PDFs.

There's lots of chatter right now about adding books (eBooks, booklets) to blogs - particularly law firm blogs.  Usually, this talk is accompanied with a discussion of coordinating those publications with an offer for the book at no charge in exchange for the reader signing up to a service like Aweber.

More and more law firms are doing this.  A nice book cover image appears in the sidebar; it's a free offer for in-depth information on an important topic like tips on avoiding foreclosure; tips on making end of life decisions; ways to limit risk in alternative investments, etc.  Click on the image and the reader usually has to provide an email address in order to get the freebie, and afterwards that email address may receive a series of follow-ups: more free information, etc.

Choosing to Build a Book for Your Blog or Web Site  

Along with the chatter about books on blogs comes lots of confusion and I've had several calls from clients and colleagues that are overwhelmed about the process (or options) once they start investigating this stuff.  Once they understand their state's bar regulations on the issue, and they've got a game plan on what they want to accomplish, then comes the practical decisions to be made.  How to get this done - it's not as easy as it may first appear. 

Offering a free book on your blog is not a bad idea -- it's a good idea -- but you need to know at the get-go that it isn't all that easy to get from start to finish.

Right now, self-publishing eBooks are trendy.  These are coded documents that can be read on specific devices (e-Readers) like Kindles, Nooks, Sony eReaders, as well as IPads, Kindle Fires, etc.

This is usually the first kind of document that the lawyer envisions.  Maybe the only one, because many aren't considering PDF formatted documents as something that can create snazzy books for their sidebar.   All this talk about self-publishing means many lawyers don't understand the different options open to them. 


PDF Books for Your Sidebar

For lots of lawyers and law firms, the formatted eBook alternative of using a .pdf document, formatted both for security and for a professional appearance, is the preferred option.  Surf around and you will find that PDF documents are appearing quite often in blog and site sidebars as the chosen format for that free book offering.

Why a PDF?  

1.  PDF books are easy to create: you can create your book using Microsoft Word or Open Office.  No need to learn fancy coding like you need for a self-published eBook for Kindles or IPads.  

2.  PDF books can be full-color with sophisticated graphic design.  This format allows a glossy, magazine-like product that self-published eBooks cannot provide now with their coding limitations.  Kindles and other eReaders don't like images very much, and they are hard to insert into the reader-approved format. 

3.  The PDF option gives you lots of number-play.  With a PDF book, you can include all sorts of graphs or tables or pie chart images that the Amazon/Smashwords/etc. coded eBook cannot include now.  Footnotes, no problem.  E books coded for Kindle or the IPad or the Nook are best left to words alone, black on white text, with hyperlinks.  No footnotes, please.  Check out various magazines, blogs, and other graphically-oriented publications on the nearest Kindle or Sony E-Reader and see what you find.  

4.  Most readers are familiar with the PDF format; additionally, these documents can be read on almost every device.  You can even upload a PDF document onto a Kindle, for example.  However, you cannot read a Kindle eBook on any device other than a Kindle eReader or a computer that has downloaded the free Kindle software onto its hard drive.  

  

What I Suggest You Consider Doing For Your First Publication

For law firm clients ready to place books on their blogs or web sites, I proposed that they review their blogs or newsletters to find a series of posts or a single theme that can serve as the springboard for a .pdf document.   

Next, prepare a Word (or Open Office) document with text that flows, pulling together those blog posts or newsletter articles into a cohesive document that will serve the reader well as a PDF book.  Make sure to include a table of contents and an "about the author" section.  

Work with a graphic designer if you choose to do so, or just use a Word template.  Get your Word document looking like a professional product, then convert it to a PDF document.  

Make sure that you have your security features in place (no cutting and pasting, limited sharing or printing, etc.) and you're done.  

Now you have a very nice offering, in a format that most recognize and can read on whatever screen they choose to use, that can be:

             a.  placed on the blog;

             b.  sent by email to whomever you choose; and

             c.  used in an email marketing campaign;

             

Cut and Pasting From the Web: Be Careful.

Last week, another client was happily posting away on their blog and proud of their word count.  Which was good.  However, most of that word count involved cutting and pasting from other web sites.  Not so good.

First of all, it's fine to share news releases.  They are written to be distributed -- the intent of that release is to get that message out.  So, sharing these cuts and paste excerpts in a blog post with an intro "news from Acme site this week" is not a bad, horrible (and by that I mean illegal) thing to do.

Second, it's fine to share information provided on government sites, for example in their "frequently asked questions" section.  Intro the cut and paste excerpt with something like "the [name of agency] recommends the following" and you're fine. 

Third, it's okay to share your own stuff.  Excerpts from your firm website in a firm blog post isn't violating anything.  Example:  the post is discussing a major product recall and you provide an excerpt from the site that discusses your state's products liability law. 

Here's where it's not okay.  It is not okay to take content from other sites - especially news sites - and cut and paste them into your blog post, wham bam.  My client, excited about coverage in the media, plugged media coverage into the blog without getting any okay from the media source.

Not to mention not checking with the news source to determine how much they wanted in payment for the use of their news story.  And its photos. 

Luckily, that post was not published online before someone checked with me and I pointed out that this was copyright infringement of the copyright held by the media source. 

Newspapers and television news departments publish news with photos and videos online because that is how they generate revenue.  They will share that content and those images with you, but they may want payment for the use.  Maybe it's a lot.  Maybe it's a little.

Point is: news stories and television videos - even if you are prominently a part of the story - should not be duplicated on your web site or blog without the permission of the copyright owner. 

Sure, you may think I am nit-picking.  After all, aren't you helping that news source by publicizing its work?  Sorry, but I don't know that the owner of the copyright will agree with that argument.  And, after all, isn't the story all about you and your victorious win, so don't you have some sort of indirect ownership right in the news article anyway?  No.  No you don't.     

Go ahead if you want to risk it.  Lots of sites do this, true.  However, now that NewsRight is out of the box, my nit-picking today may seem prophetical tomorrow.

Better safe than sorry, folks.  Plus, it's the right thing to do.  Don't just plug those news articles into a blog post, even if you or your firm is the star of the story. 

What is Google Panda and Why You Should Care, and How Much, About Panda's Power over Your Site or Blog

This past week, one of my law firm clients had a problem with a guest post they were providing on another blog.  Seems that company had heard of Google Panda and was so scared of Google Panda that they refused to publish the guest post unless one paragraph within the post was rewritten -- it was quoting from the law firm's blog, and they were terrified that Google would penalize their site for duplicate content. 

Of course, this is ridiculous.  However, it was easier in time and money for my law firm client to rewrite a paragraph than argue over SEO, so there was one problem solved.  However, all this hoopla has me hearing more and more terrorized, trembling comments from colleagues and clients about the very scary Google Panda and what it means .....

So, here goes. 

First of all, what the heck is Google Panda?

Google Panda is a change in the algorithms used by Google to decide which site gets ranked first, second, third, etc. in the results list it provides to your search request.  This began months ago; there was a recent Panda update in October 2011 that some consider to be pretty big. 

Short version: the top secret mumbo jumbo that Google uses to decide who gets top billing got revamped.  

Why do this?  Google tries to explain in a February 2011 blog post, pointing to a desire to move "high quality sites" up in the search results and "reduce" the ranking of "low quality sites."  Low quality sites specifically including those that copy content from other sites ... and here is where some big reactions have come.  Some pretty big and established sites saw themselves fall in ranking at Google.com.  What the heck was going on?  So, Google provided "additional guidance" on how Google searches and ranks web sites in May 2011. 

Google suggests that you look at your site from their perspective, and ask yourself the following questions:

• Would you trust the information presented in this article?
• Is this article written by an expert or enthusiast who knows the topic well, or is it more shallow in nature?
• Does the site have duplicate, overlapping, or redundant articles on the same or similar topics with slightly different keyword variations?
• Would you be comfortable giving your credit card information to this site?
• Does this article have spelling, stylistic, or factual errors?
• Are the topics driven by genuine interests of readers of the site, or does the site generate content by attempting to guess what might rank well in search engines?
• Does the article provide original content or information, original reporting, original research, or original analysis?
• Does the page provide substantial value when compared to other pages in search results?
• How much quality control is done on content?
• Does the article describe both sides of a story?
• Is the site a recognized authority on its topic?
• Is the content mass-produced by or outsourced to a large number of creators, or spread across a large network of sites, so that individual pages or sites don’t get as much attention or care?
• Was the article edited well, or does it appear sloppy or hastily produced?
• For a health related query, would you trust information from this site?
• Would you recognize this site as an authoritative source when mentioned by name?
• Does this article provide a complete or comprehensive description of the topic?
• Does this article contain insightful analysis or interesting information that is beyond obvious?
• Is this the sort of page you’d want to bookmark, share with a friend, or recommend?
• Does this article have an excessive amount of ads that distract from or interfere with the main content?
• Would you expect to see this article in a printed magazine, encyclopedia or book?
• Are the articles short, unsubstantial, or otherwise lacking in helpful specifics?
• Are the pages produced with great care and attention to detail vs. less attention to detail?
• Would users complain when they see pages from this site?

From what I know at this point, Google Panda will still get some more tweeks, and in the long run, Google is always going to be trying to better itself -- to make sure that you don't find another search engine preferable to Google.  It looks like Google is trying to thwart content mills that just copy stuff from other sites and republish them as their own, you know the sneaky ones that I mean; however, sites that do things like publish press releases are getting hit here, too, and that's not fair (e.g., PR Newswire). 

Some reputable sites are facing a 60% loss in web traffic after Google Panda - and that's money either in sales or jobs or marketing or something, folks.  Sixty percent is a huge hit, and it's not hitting those sneaky, yucky, content copying sites -- it's hitting respectable, longstanding sites that are understandably peeved.  For many folk, being angry and fearful of the Google Panda Power is justified and I hope they get their trains back on the track soon. 

However, Google's position is understandable and if you are writing for the web with the intent to add value then I don't think Panda Power is something for you to lose sleep over.  I learned today from David Naylor that Google Panda isn't named after the cute bear but after a Google engineer named Navneet Panda.  I like David Naylor's two cents worth on Google Panda: ask yourself two questions and stop worrying about it.  The questions?  Go read Naylor's post to find out. 

And, if you really want to learn all about this, Search Engine Roundtable has done a video on Google Panda (including the October 2011 updates) which you can watch on YouTube. It's ten and half minutes, if you've got the time.

google, blogs, blogging, google panda, seo

Florida Bar's Advertising Rules Are Found Unconstitutional by Federal Judge

Details are given in an article in today's Wall Street Journal entitled, "Florida Court Strikes Down Limits on Lawyer Advertising," concerning the opinion released last Friday by the Honorable Marcia Morales Howard of United States District Court for the Division of Jacksonville.

The federal judge has held that the Florida Bar violated the First Amendment rights of Florida attorney William Harrell Jr. when it deemed Mr. Harrell's advertising message of "don't get less than you deserve," as "manipulative" and therefore in violation of state solicitation rules. 

How much will this decision impact Florida attorneys?  Maybe not so much:  right now, amendments to the Florida Disciplinary Rules await approval by the Supreme Court of Florida. 

To review the rules in place for Florida attorney advertising, go here.
To review the rules that were proposed this summer for Florida Supreme Court approval, go here. 

Lawyers Should Know Ethics Rules and Social Media Policies for Blogs and Social Media (LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook): Bar Regs and Other Social Media Guidelines

Individual bar associations across the country may or may not have regulations governing social media on their books: social media moves fast; the process of creating new rules to govern the practice of law within certain jurisdictions, not so much.

Obviously, lawyers should know their own bar rules and regulations, since they are bound by the ethical rules applicable to their jurisdiction(s).  That's not the only attempt at corralling online communications on the web, however. 

Social Media Policies and Guidelines Established for Private Companies and Public Entities

Attorneys should be aware that social media policies and online communication guidelines are being set up by many different types of entities now; savvy lawyers will be aware of those internet rules and regulations that may apply to certain clientele - as well as those of a competing law firm (e.g., the April 2011 social media guidelines established by Baker & Daniels).

For example, there are social media policies in place for the States of Delaware, Oklahoma, and North Carolina as well as big corporations like Ford Motor Company, FedEx, and Coca-Cola. Many more have been collected for review by Chris Boudreaux at SocialMediaGovernance.com, an excellent go-to site for those interested in learning more about the evolving trends in controlling social media today.

Lawyers and Ethical Rules, Social Media Guidelines

Does the attorney have to know these social media guidelines?  No, the lawyer will not be controlled by these policies; however, he or she should be able to explain why they disagree with a particular guideline if a client, potential client, or referral source asks about it after reading the lawyer's blog or social media tweets, pokes, etc.  Having access to this information when creating an internal set of online social media guidelines as part of law firm policy will also be very helpful. 

Does the lawyer need to know about ethical rules?  Yes, they do need to know what their local and state bar associations have defined as acceptable online communications.  Lawyers and law firms should be aware of the ethical rules and regulations that apply to their online activities: they may be disciplined for violating them (e.g., reprimand, suspension).

In some states, a broad brush is applied to blogs, Twitter accounts, and pages on LinkedIn, Facebook (and now Google+) where the governing body attempts to regulate these new marketing avenues using the same solicitation rules already in place for things like web sites and direct e-mail communications.  Comments and guidelines to existing ethical codes need to be monitored. 

For example, the State Bar of Texas has tried to keep up with the rapid changes in social media by issuing an "interpretive comment" to work in conjunction with Part 7 of the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct. 

Another example: the State Bar of Florida, which has passed specific regulatory language that applies specifically to the growing use of social media by attorneys and law firms.  Shown below is the Florida Bar's Guideline for Networking Sites, note how Florida goes into detail about such things as LinkedIn professional pages and Instant Messages: 

Lawyers Write Blogs About All Sorts of Things - The Evolution of Lawyer Blogs

The word "blog" is actually a contraction of the phrase "web log," and back in the day, folk wrote web logs or journals, usually writing about personal diary-like topics: day's events, family life, etc.  As the internet grew in popularity and technology got more user-friendly, it cost less in time and money to start a web log. 

People took notice.  Business minds pondered how these logs, or journals, could be revamped to sell products or services.  News junkies started blogs to share scoops (think Drudge Report).  Educators thought of ways blogs could provide learning opportunities and ways to share information over the web.  Political pundits started blogs to share their views (e.g., Little Green Footballs).  Families figured out how blogs could connect loved ones in all sorts of locations, even in war zones.  The list goes on.

In the midst of this, there were lawyers who started blogs with a personal touch.  They opined to their colleagues about pending cases, new legislation, the state of the law - and of the legal profession.  Some were more analysis-oriented than others, but it was usually a single attorney writing a short blog post (article on a web log) several times a month, or week, or day, like Howard J. Bashman's How Appealing where he's been writing "the Web's first blog devoted to appellate litigation" since May 2002. 

Then the idea hit for business development via a web log or blog.  We began reading more about "blawgs."  Law firm web sites were no longer cutting edge; now, blawgs were the new trend.   Law firm marketing strategies began to incorporate blogs into their rainmaking plans in much the same way that Web 2. 0 campaigns do now (i.e., the use of Twitter and Facebook and LinkedIn). 

Blogs for lawyers and law firms diversified.  The intended readers of lawyer-generated blogs are varied: some are targeting potential clients, some are targeting referring attorneys, some are seeking to support an issue or to build public awareness about it.

Some blawgs consistently give opinion, some never do.  Some blawgs are funny, some are serious.  Some deal with the law, and some don't. 

Lawyers Who Blog About Things Other Than Law -- Ten Examples

For example, here are a few blogs appearing on the web today that are written by lawyers that have nothing to do with legal issues:

1. Appalachian Trail Hike 2010 -- coverage of  hiking the Appalachian Trail " ... from the perspective of a lawyer, an ivy grad, and a city chick," via a blog on the Blogger platform (together with videos on MySpace, photos on Picasa, etc.), hiking from Georgia to Maine in one year's time. There's a documentary now, too. 
2. Nathan B. Hannah, Attorney   -- periodic posts on jazz from a lawyer "who'd rather write music commentary."  Wish he'd write more - what's there is good stuff. 
3. Ironlawyer -- an attorney posts about preparing for an Ironman competition with her husband - they completed a half-Ironman in May 2011.  Hopefully, there will be more posts after they recuperate.
4. Paul's Travel Blog -- with periodic blog posts, this lawyer dedicates his travelogue to "...discuss[ing] a bit how a legal education changes your general behavior, decreases your appetite for certain kinds of risk. Now, it is true that the profession probably draws the risk-adverse simply because a legal education is seen as a "safe" field for moderate professional and economic success.... Yes, I believe that law school and law practice have made me a more cautious, risk-adverse person."
5. Instapundit --  Glenn Reynolds is a law professor at the University of Tennessee who publishes a political blog as part of "Pajamas Media," whose personal passion is pondering "...the intersection between advanced technologies and individual liberty."  Instapundit has been on the web since 2001.
6. Black Coffee and a Donut -- two sisters who are both attorneys have dedicated their blog to their foodie passion, and have a great food blog with very nice photos covering local restaurants as well as food finds during their travels (which do include Paris, of course).  Recently covered in the Baltimore, Maryland Daily Record.
7. Everyday Simplicity -- my own blog, begun in January 2006, where I post regularly on issues of living a simplicity lifestyle, which includes issues like going green, downsizing, career change, recipes, cleaning tips, and being more frugal. 
8. LeffStyle -- former NYC entertainment lawyer blogs on interior design with lots of photos, who educates readers not only on design, but designers. Chic and fun.
9. Michelle's In Cambodia -- as a lawyer who moves overseas to Cambodia to teach English and have adventure, Michelle is as much a photographer as a writer and there are many wonderful photos uploaded here on her blog documenting her journey as well as her periodic posts.
10. ProFootballTalk - an all-things-football blog, hosted by NBC.com as of June 2009, with lawyer Mike Florio as its editor; Florio also contributes posts to its "Daily Rumor Mill," with news tips as well as his viewpoints on all things pro football.  It's not known how much Florio got paid by NBC when he sold his blog to them, but he's remained at its helm as editor since the sale. 

TweetDeck Users, Third Party Apps: Did a Twitter War Start Today?

I spend lots of time counseling fellow lawyers on how to effectively and efficiently use Twitter - both for personal use and for professional business development.  Once they get going, they usually decide to flip from going directly to their Twitter page (http://www.twitter.com/)  to tweet, opting instead for more user-friendly sites that are not owned by Twitter ("third party apps"). 

The most popular of these is TweetDeck (at least, that's what I'm hearing). TweetDeck is cool.  TweetDeck also lets you do other things besides tweet -- you can connect with LinkedIn and Facebook from TweetDeck, too.  Handy for lots of folk.

However, there is news for all you TweetDeck lovers.  Appears that TweetDeck has been purchased by UberMedia, and Twitter isn't happy with UberMedia.

Twitter Has Thrown Down the Gauntlet Regarding Third Party Applications

Why?  For one thing, Twitter may not like the latest feature offered by TweetDeck: Deck.ly, which lets you post longer tweets.  Deck.ly gets you around that 140 character limit.  Which, some may argue takes away the very raison d'etre of tweeting - but hey.  It's here. 

You can all the details on today's post by Neal Wiser, "The End of the 140 Character Tweet and Its Repercussions." 

Other applications that may be impacted by Twitter's new warning include:  

1. HootSuite
2. Klout
3. Seesmic
4. SocialFlow

For more information on Twitter's relationship with third party apps, because it's not just TweetDeck we're talking about here, check out these recent articles too:

1. Wired Magazine,  "Twitter Clamps Down On Third-Party Clients," by Mark Brown.
2. PC Magazine, Twitter to Devs: No New Third-Party Apps," by Leslie Horn.
3. PC World, "Twitter to Third Party Clients: Drop Dead," by Harry McCracken, Technologizer.

What's Going On Here?

Personally, one big hitch for me in tweeting from my Twitter home page is its inability to allow me to easily shorten urls.  Time waster that Twitter should have solved long ago.  Maybe I wouldn't mind tweeting from Twitter itself if they made it as easy for me as other developers have done with their free apps. 

Apparently, Twitter is waking up to the competition doing a better job, sniffs some money to be made, and is trying to grab those profits.  Fine, let them duke it out. 

I'm not loyal to any third party app.  I will go with whomever provides me the best service -- which translates into FREE and FAST.  I'm not going to dedicate much time from my day to tweeting, and neither are my clients. 

Bottom line, compete.  Go for it.  However, Twitter better not mess with blocking what's already working for us. 

AVVO - Reviews to Consider B4 You Claim Your Profile

AVVO.COM is a lawyer rating site - maybe you've seen it.  However, before you include your name - or that of your law firm - on Avvo, consider the following 5 (+1) issues:

1.  Avvo is on the Ripoff Report. 

2.  Last year, New York HR attorney Charles Krugel gave an in-depth review of the site - it's worth your time to read.

3.  Read the Wikipedia article (I know, I know) and find, among other things, info regarding a lawsuit filed against the service (which reviews both doctors and lawyers) where the plaintiffs alleged that Avvo.com is a sham since its review system isn't scientfically sound -- and where the case was dismissed not because of the allegation that the ratings are bogus, but on 1st Amendment Free Speech grounds.  The Judge ruled that assuming arguendo that they are bogus, they are constitutionally protected nevertheless.  (Justia has Browne et al v. Avvo here, pleadings and opinion, if you're interested.)  Since then, fyi, there's been another suit filed (in 2010, out of Florida - read the pleading here).

4.  There's a search engine optimization strategy here that lawyers (and doctors) don't recognize is part of the Avvo.com agenda - details explained here by Barry Hurd, and you need to read his comments, too. 

5.  Debra Bruce of Lawyer-Coach, Inc. provides a good summary of the Avvo controversy here, in a pdf available online from the State Bar of Texas. 

Here's my suggestion -- before you jump into Avvo, go read the reviews of lawyers and law firms in your community.  You may find some shocking results ... as Ms. Bruce points out.  Consider the raison d'etre of this site: to build ranking on the web.  Avvo.com is focused upon building its own site authority on the web, and lawyers who sign up benefit from dovetailing with them.  Read Hurd's discussion of this for details.

6. And, one big reminder:  it's important to check with your State Bar to insure that any Avvo listing is okay with them. 

It may not be -- remember, there are testimonials on the site and that's a big no-no in many states (at least for lawyers).   Earlier this month, the Broward County Bar Association discussed this in their latest meeting ("AVVO Testimonials on Florida Attorney Profiles") and the latest from Florida is that lawyers there can "claim" their Avvo profile, but they cannot solicit testimonials for the site - tho Florida allows these testimonials to appear. 

And nope, I don't know the answer to the question "how can the Florida Bar enforce this distinction?"  Your guess is as good as mine on that one.

Google Places: What Attorneys and Law Firms Need to Know - and Beware the Scams!

Google Places is a big deal for lawyers.  How big is Google Places for law firms and attorneys on the web?  Remains to be seen. 

The Onslaught of Cold Calls to Law Firms Pushing Google Places SEO Services - Beware of Scams!

I'd just had a week of clients (and fellow lawyers) contacting me in a panic after hanging up with hard-sell marketing cold calls pushing them to drop everything and deal with the purported game-changer of Google Places.  It's amazing what these internet marketing specialists are offering to attorneys who are too busy or too disinterested to investigate this new Google tactic for themselves.  Buyer beware, my friends.

Caveat: I'm a legal writer - not a SEO expert.  I do write optimized content, but I don't provide the usual panorama of search engine optimization services: no pay-per-click, etc.  I'm not interested in providing Google Place services, but I am concerned that scams concerning Google Places don't succeed.  And they are out there, and they're growing.

What is Google Places?

Google Places is a new service provided by Google that some may recognize as "place search."  It's a big deal because Google search results look different now, as a result of Google Places.  Now, for example, when you search for "injury law firm Houston" the first page of Google Search Results is filled with Google Place Results.

You sign up for free at Google Places.  You pay for "tags."  Your business gets reviewed by whomever wants to take the time to do so, and until recently, the business owner couldn't control negative reviews.  That's apparently been changed recently by Google.

Here's the Reason for the Brouhaha: Google Place sites get priority in search results. Your optmized web site is bumped down below the Place listings.

Google Place is being stuck atop the usual Google search results, and you can identify the Place sites by the little alphabetized red flag (A gets the highest rank, etc.) that is predominantly displayed next to the individual result description.  The flags correspond to the map that is shown in the right sidebar. 

So, no matter how much you paid some web marketing firm to optimize your site so you get in the top search results for your areas of practice or locality, you will be bumped by those Google Place listings to page 2 or 3 of the search results. 

What Can You - the Busy Attorney or Law Firm - Do About Google Places?

First, you can recognize that this is impacting web sites - not blogs.  Your blogs, established as a seperate domain name, will continue getting Google search results based upon the posts you are writing, etc.  Law firm blogs, or "blawgs," are safe. 

Second, you can do several things for yourself, for free and without much complication.  These include:

1. Go to Google Places and list your law firm.  Put in the same info that you see on your business card.  Do not be creative here.  Resist the urge to do multiple listings: AttorneySync, for example, warns that this can result in Google penalizing your site as violating its quality guidelines.
2. Take advantage of the free service, GetListed.org, and make sure that your firm appears in Bing, Yahoo, etc.  Why? Google is known to cross-reference these sites to make sure your Place information is accurate.  (In SEO lingo, these third party references are "citations.")  Your firm information (address, phone number, email address) needs to be exactly the same in all the citations for Google Place purposes.
3. Access your web site and insure that it is filled with images, links, etc. that are local in nature.  Garrett French has already accumulated a list of forty-four (44) query tips to help you do this. 

Do you need to hire someone to do this?  From what I've read online, experts do not agree on this.  Should you decide to hire someone for Google Place services, then be sure that they are indeed an expert in this area -- and check what they're charging.  It's amazing the scamming going on out there -- and by some very, very "reputable" firms (for instance, charging for duplicate Place submissions despite the fact that Google may well penalize the duplication in the future).

What's Really Going On Here?  More Money for Google

Google is focusing upon providing localized search results not just because it's considered to be more convenient for the Google user -- Dustin Ruge explains that Google expects Google Places to make it lots of money.  According to Ruge:

Local search is one of the fastest growing categories online and Google now claims that 20% of their search queries are local in nature. Furthering this is the rapid growth in mobile search where Google now claims that over 100 million people conduct maps searches from their mobile devices each month. By 2013, mobile device searches are expected to exceed PC based searches. But Google makes money off the their paid advertising and when local online advertising is expected to grow at 18% compared to only 11% for all online advertising by 2011, it is little mystery why Google is looking to profit from it.

What's the Real Result?

Too soon to tell, I think.  Personally, the Place results bug me so much, that I'll switch over to Bing or Yahoo rather than deal with them.  Google Places feels manipulative to me as a user, I don't like it.

Second, law firms may need to avoid Google Places as it implements and encourages its review feature.  Recently, Google announced the addition of the HotPot recommendation service to Google Places.  In many states, bar ethic rules prohibit this sort of recommendation service for law firms. 

There's probably more fall out.  And, here's the thing:  Google Places isn't really helpful in finding the best lawyer for the client - because the best attorney for the particular matter isn't necessarily the law office that's closest in proximity. 

The real answer for attorneys to Google Places is to find a way to educate the public on this key issue (to the extent that the public doesn't recognize this simple fact already).  For me, that answer online is easy: blog.