or
The Specialist Conundrum and Writing for SEM and Conversion
or
Dump the Search Engine Marketing Formula
Thesis: Writing Web site copy for lawyers that uses the SEM formula of Geography+Practice Area+Lawyer is not ethically acceptable except in three cases: 1. where the practice area is a general field of stuffy, 2. where the attorney is a patent attorney, or 3. where the attorney is a specialist.
When writing for fun and for profit for a law firm Web site, one must consider the wrath of the state office of lawyers professional responsibility. The number one consideration in marketing copy for attorneys is not the number of Web site hits (and maybe even clients) the copy can generate. In fact, the number one priority must be that no text, meta data, or html violates state bar rules of ethics.
Thought experiment: What would happen if I write content that gets a lawyer disbarred? Undoubtedly, during the ethics hearing, the work would be attributed to me. Such third-party attribution would not free the lawyer of his or her ethical duty, but I would earn a special reputation … of getting lawyers disbarred. This reputation would spread like wildfire. One would have to conclude that if a client of mine was disbarred, I would ultimately suffer.I would conjecture that even lesser penalties than disbarment would injure my reputation and success.
Perhaps the most common search engine marketing technique used by lawyers and law firms on the Internet today is to compose formulaic phrases that combine a geographic term, a practice area, and the word attorney (or lawyer). Firms and marketing advisors do such in order to attract specific searches. Popular belief has been that search engine like exact matches better than imprecise matches: e.g., a search for Minnesota DWI Lawyer is more likely to hit Minnesota DWI Lawyer than to hit Minnesota Lawyer Practicing DWI Defense. Hard proof, to my knowledge, does not exist. Still, such is the claim.
Now we come to a point where two ideas critical to this analysis must be laid out and explained.
Generalist Attorney: All attorneys in the United States are, by default, generalists. Any lawyer can do any legal work in any state in which he or she holds a license to practice—with one exception. No attorney who is not admitted to the Patent Bar may practice patent law (i.e., to write patent applications for money, one must be a “Patent Lawyer”).
Specialist Attorney: Certain states allow attorneys with certain experience to study hard and take classes and attempt exams upon passage of which those lawyers can call themselves “certified” or “board certified” or “specialist” et cetera. No attorney who has not become board certified may call him or herself a specialist. Or, in plain English, an attorney must pass certification to call himself a specialist. No exceptions.
Never Say Never
The Patent Attorney Exception: State lawyers ethics rules, such as in Minnesota, allow attorneys who have indeed passed the patent bar to call themselves patent attorneys without any further specialization. As an example, the Minnesota Rules specifically allow only patent attorneys to call themselves by any special designation. Technically, no other attorney may call herself a [Example Practice Area] Attorney.
By all means, all attorneys who are not Patent Attorneys or Specialist Attorneys must not even be calling themselves [Any Practice Area] Attorneys. However, there seem to be some generalized exceptions. Attorneys are free to call themselves the following (non-exhaustive list) without any obvious hassle:
- Personal Injury Lawyer
- Criminal Defense Lawyer
- Civil Litigator
- Family Law Attorney
- Trial Attorney
- Civil Rights Attorney
- Estate Planning Lawyer
- Real Estate Lawyer
- Tax Lawyer
- Elder Law Attorney
Attorney may easily be substituted for lawyer in this list.
What is Minneapolis Social Security Disability?
Part of the problem with the SEM formula of Geography Practice Area Attorney is that, unless used with super-hyper-extreme care, any formula that goes beyond the aforementioned [Sample Practice Area] Lawyer can run the risk of the attorney holding him or herself out as a specialist in the named field. If that attorney is a specialist, then the formula may be used without apprehension! As long as the phrase is used as permitted by the board of certification. However, “criminal defense specialist” does not permit “Experienced Minneapolis Drug Trafficking and Assault Yer Momma Defense Lawyer.” But, if the attorney is not a specialist in the field of law, the attorney could be fined, suspended, or disbarred.
So, what is the problem with Minneapolis Social Security Disability Benefits Lawyer?
1. Social Security is federal. There is no state or municipal Social Security, even though such programs as Medicaid are administered by the states.
2. An attorney cannot certified in Social Security Disability Benefits (at least not in Minnesota, and probably not in any state).
Now, I am being hyper-critical here on purpose. Let’s use the state closest to home as our example. Here’s an excerpt from the head lawyer from the MN Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility as published in Bench & Bar magazine:
Rule 7.4(d), MRPC, prohibits an attorney in a communication from stating or implying that he is a specialist unless 1) the name of the certifying organization is clearly identified, or 2) if the individual is not certified, then a statement to that effect must appear in the same sentence in which specialization was stated or implied. The attorney in this instance was not a certified specialist and the letter did not contain the required disclaimer.
This means that, even if you could use a term like Minneapolis SSD Benefits Lawyer, you must disclaim in every sentence in which the phrase appears that you are not implying that you are a specialist. Failure to do so can be grounds for discipline. No state, that I’m aware of, is any less strict than this.
Dump the SEM Formula
The conclusion? Do not use the formula. Unless you can claim specialization, or are using the formula in a generic field of practice as laid out above, you run the risk of soliciting the ire of the office of lawyers professional responsibility. Such is never a good thing.
Future essays will cover the no-no’s of superfluous words and unprovable claims.
Extraneous
Here’s a fun little blast from my philosophy undergrad past: My SEM for lawyers Web site conjectures expressed in terms of the language of logic.Attorney := Lawyer
Licensed Attorney := Licensed Lawyer
Patent Attorney := Patent Lawyer
Certified Attorney := Certified Lawyer
Graduate of Law School ←→ Attorney
(Attorney & Pass Bar Exam) ←→ Licensed Attorney
(Licensed Attorney & Pass Patent Bar) ←→ Patent Attorney
(Licensed Attorney & Certified) ←→ Certified Attorney
Et cetera; that’s enough.
Since I am in the business of reviewing attorney Web sites in Minnesota and offering legal advice on the very same, I should plug my own Web site. Shouldn’t I?
Lawyers Ethics in Advertising
Take care.
No comments:
Post a Comment