After a break from blogging, I’m finally back at it. Some stuff I found interesting during the break: [click to continue…]
{ 0 comments }
From the category archives:
Internet For Lawyers 101
As I’ve mentioned on this blog before, I’m involved in an Internet campaign to spread information and make legal services available to people who have had the misfortune to find Chinese drywall installed in their homes or businesses. As we’ve done many times over the past decade, my partner and I have organized an alliance of law firms in multiple states, with lawyers licensed to practice law in most of states with significant numbers of cases, including Louisiana, Florida, Virginia, Mississippi, Alabama and many others. I’ll state at the outset that I believe that the only way a homeowner with a Chinese drywall problem is going to get the problem fixed is to file a lawsuit, either by joining in the MDL in New Orleans, or by filing an individual lawsuit against the builder and suppliers. I do not recommend that anyone wait around for the Consumer Product Safety Commission or some other governmental agency to fix their homes. And I believe that any delay by a homeowner before filing suit is simply time he or she loses in getting the money to replace the drywall.
When I began this project, I believed it would follow the same course as previous mass tort projects on which I have worked since 2000; cases such as those involving the deadly liver drug Rezulin, the cholestoral drug Baycol, artificial Sulzer Hip and Knee Joints, Diet Drug Litigation (diet drugs caused heart damage and primary pulmonary hypertension (a potentially life-threatening lung condition) among many people who had no history of heart problems), Yamaha Rhino rollovers (caused by design defects in the Rhinos), etc. I expected to create one or more websites that was full of information, optimize the website so it could be easily found by searchers who were looking for the information and services we offered, and make it as easy as possible for those people become informed and retain us if they wanted to do so.
This project has been somewhat different. Although we are getting substantial traffic to our website, and are talking to a number of people on the telephone and are reviewing a number of case review forms, I am getting the sense that, compared with our previous mass tort cases, a higher percentage of CDW victims don’t seem to know what to do.
I have my own hypothesis. I can’t remember being involved in a mass tort in which so many politicians and governement agencies are involved. Every politician seems to want to express his/her outrage, particularly if his/her constituents are affected by the problem. And the relevant governmental agencies feel obligated to release reports, even if the reports don’t really reach any conclusions. Then the politicians go back and complain about the slow manner in which the government is dealing with the problem, and several dozen news articles are written or put on television everytime one of these things happens. A Google News search today for “Chinese drywall” returns 922 articles. And none of them provide real, comprehensive advice about how the homeowner can get the problem resolved. If a person runs a Google search for the commonly-searched term “Chinese sheetrock,” a post I wrote on our Chinese Drywall Attorney Alliance site is the top-ranked lawyer-provided page. But it still doesn’t appear in the top ten results on Google.
For example, on Nov. 23, 2009, the lawyers for the Consumer Product Safety Commission wrote a letter to Senators Bill Newlson and Mark Warner, and representatives Jim Webb and Glenn Nye. A great deal of waffling is found in the letter, which concedes that investigators eyes were irritated when they inspected homes with Chinese drywall (CDW), but the letter didn’t make a single recommendation telling people what they should do.
I admit I have bemoaned the ugly Search Engine Results Pages (SERPs) sometimes created by Google when someone searches for a mass-tort related term. Somehow, it appears slightly hucksterish to see all those page titles saying “[name your tort or defective product] Lawsuit, lawyer, attorney, law firm….” But if you run a Google search for “Chinese drywall” the top ten results are news results (as of Thanksgiving day 2009). None of the news articles offers help getting the money to remove and replace your drywall. I’m as big a news junkie as anyone (hey, Google News is my homepage), but the integration of News results into Google web search seems to be going a bit too far. I still believe many people search Google News for news articles, but search Google web for more in-depth information and the type information they need to solve problems.
Am I forgetting the ability of lawyers to appear at the time of Google by purchasing pay-per-click ads? No, but the most recent data I saw on the issue still indicates that people are about twice as likely to click on an organic (natural) listing rather than a pay-per-click listing. Even though I sometimes use pay-per-click ads, I still believe at least a few good legal marketers should be able to find their way to put genuinely helpful information onto the first page of Google’s results with the necessity of resorting to pay-per-click advertising.
There may be other instances in which the heavy integration of traditional news into the top of Google’s web search results are beneficial, but I don’t think it’s helping CDW victims who are trying to decide what they need to do to solve their CDW problem. Call me a skeptic, but I don’t believe anyone is going to get his or her Chinese drywall problem solved by a person who walks up with a CPSC card and says “I’m from the government, and I’m here to help you.” I think the challenge for those of us with information and services that can actually help Chinese drywall victims is to break through the noise that has been created by politicians, political agencies, and the news media, and continue putting out a message of clarity that is easily found by those who are searching for help with their Chinese drywall problems.
I expect to lauch ConsumerNews.com within weeks (after having fired and replaced a developer). Pro-consumer lawyers and others who want to communicate directly to consumers will have an avenue via that site, especially if they are communicating on a topic that is news-driven, such as Chinese drywall. If you or your organization is interested in being a sponsor or advertiser on ConsumerNews.com, which will cover stories of interest to consumers from a distinctively pro-consumer point-of-view, please contact me.
{ 0 comments }
An interesting article in Online Media Daily discusses a report released Wednesday by The Nielsen Co. Charles Buchwalter, SVP of research and analytics at Nielsen Online, said “In recent years, the Internet has changed dramatically as people seek more personalized relationships online. In particular, time spent on social networks and video sites has increased astronomically.”
More from the article: ” Internet users today tend to prefer sites that contain more specialized content, according to Nielsen. This change in preferences is seen in the fact that video and social networking sites have moved to the forefront, becoming the two fastest-growing categories in 2009.
The number of U.S. consumers who frequent online video destinations has climbed 339% since 2003, while time spent on video sites has shot up almost 2,000% over the same period. In the last year alone, unique viewers of online video grew 10%, while the number of streams grew 41%, the streams per user grew 27%, and the total minutes engaged with online video grew 71%.”
With these numbers, it’s not surprising that we are seeing some lawyers turning to online video as part of their marketing efforts.
{ 0 comments }
After sitting there for a year without much use, Google Profiles are today getting a push from Google, according to TechCrunch.com and a number of other sources. Beginning today, all Google search queries for a person’s name will now feature a section on the Search Engine Results Page (SERP) dedicated to Google Profile results at the bottom of every page. These profiles allow people to fill out their basic information, like current employer and links to various web presences, without having to maintain a personal website. Google is allocating four thumbnail spots to these profiles at the bottom of search engine results page – anyone who doesn’t appear in those four spots can be found by clicking a link to show more results. Getting one of these four thumbnail spots is going to very desirable to some people. According to Google, the four top spots will be chosen by an algorithm that favors “complete” profiles, but Google wasn’t very specific about how the algorithm will work.
The folks at Google say, “[a] Google profile is simply how you present yourself on Google products to other Google users. It allows you to control how you appear on Google and tell others a bit more about who you are. With a Google profile, you can easily share your web content on one central location. You can include, for example, links to your blog, online photos, and other profiles such as Facebook, LinkedIn, and more. You have control over what others see. Your profile won’t display any private information unless you’ve explicitly added it.”
You can go to the Google Profile Creation Page to create your profile.
{ 0 comments }
The Wisconsin Bar recently published an interesting article with 10 Internet marketing tips for new, small law firms. While the article is sometimes short on specifics about implementing its suggestions, it is a very good beginning point for lawyers without experience in online legal marketing. I’m just going to list the 10 headings here without the full text of the article; you can read the full article here. I’m going to add some explanations/suggestions based on my own experience.
- Advertise Online.
- Invest in a professionally designed and developed web site.
- “Consumerize” your web site.
- Incorporate video on your site. [The articles suggests that you "Develop an introductory video of the managing partner that showcases personality as well as expertise. Post the video on the web (and YouTube) and even consider a TV spot down the road." My caveat, if the managing partner doesn't come across well on video, do not use the managing partner. Use the lawyer who looks best and comes across as most genuine on video. If you have to, and your bar regs permit it, hire a professional before you put up a video with a white-faced, stuttering managing partner. Also, if you can afford it, spend the money to shoot a professional video. You don't have to spend a fortune to hire a pro, and the results will be worth the money. For ideas about using video that aren't limited to interviews with your managing partner, see my post "Use online video to do things you can't do on TV."]
{ 0 comments }
TV can be a great marketing tool for lawyers, but it has limitations: (a) a 30 to 60 second message; (b) the need to gain your viewer’s confidence in 30 or 60 seconds; and (c) the need for the potential client to remember how to contact your firm. I believe you can use online video to do some things that you just can’t do on TV. We tried this in a video that we recently used in a Yamaha Rhino campaign. The Rhino is a side-by-side off road vehicle that rolls over very easily. It’s caused hundreds of deaths, amputations, and crushed bones. The Consumer Product Safety Commission is investigating the Rhino, buy Yamaha acts as if there’s no problem. I thought Yamaha deserved a satirical look at their inaction. Here’s the video:
{ 0 comments }
Some interesting questions have been raised by a lawsuit filed by the National Association of the Blind against Target, which operates both retail stores and the target.com website. The lawsuit alleged that Target’s website, discriminated against blind users in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The lawsuit alleged that the website lacked alt-text, required the use of a mouse to complete a transaction, and contained other graphical features which prevented blind users from navigating and making full use of all of the functions of Target.com. [click to continue…]
{ 0 comments }
A site named ask in wiki claims to have a list of the top 777 paying keywords from 2008. I don’t know if it’s accurate, but if it is, it’s interesting to see how many of the top keywords are related to personal-injury litigation. Mesothelioma lawsuits are especially sought-after, with bids starting at more than $85.00. [click to continue…]
{ Comments on this entry are closed }
I just saw an interesting article at Law.com asking whether pay-per-click advertising is worth it for small law firms. The article interviewed Miles Cooper, Managing Attorney of the Veen Firm in San Francisco. He said their firm had always relied on a steady diet of attorney referrals and what Cooper refers to as “cold calls.” I suppose Cooper was referring to potential clients calling the firm, even though I always thought of (and Wikipedia defines) cold calling as the process of approaching prospective customers or clients. Anyway, about a year ago the firm noticed a drop-off in “cold calls,” leading the firm to begin a pay-per-click ad campaign this January. “It was a philosophical jump for us,” Cooper said. “We thought of ourselves as one of the more prominent firms in the city, not a 1-800 ambulance firm. … But we need to make sure that our names are out there.” [click to continue…]
{ Comments on this entry are closed }
Should lawyers Twitter? For those who haven’t been keeping up with what’s going on in the “social media,” Twitter is what some call a micro-blog service that lets you post 140-character messages any time you feel like it. The Wall Street Journal’s technology blog Digits reported that Google’s Eric Schmidt referred to Twitter Tuesday as “a poor man’s email system.”
I’ve never thought anybody cared to know what I do all through the day, so I’ve never bothered to Twitter. Nevertheless, some marketing experts are now pushing everyone to Twitter, including lawyers. [click to continue…]
{ Comments on this entry are closed }
What can we do together? Since 1999 I've been using the Internet, websites, blogs, online video, Twitter and other social media to help thousands of injured people find great lawyers. We've organized national networks of lawyers in over forty states to take on Pfizer, Bayer, Yamaha and other multinational corporations. We've put consumers on a level playing field, and had fun doing it. If you're a great lawyer looking for more clients, contact me and let's see what we can do together.
Use the Contact Form or connect with me on