From the category archives:

Online Advertising

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.

Share

{ 0 comments }

An Online Media Daily article reports that Google’s top-priced AdWord in 2008 was “mesothelioma” costing $99.44 per click. The article cites AdGooroo’s Search Engine Advertising Update: Q309. According to the same report, “mesothelioma” was also Yahoo’s top-priced word, at $60.68 per click. Rich Stokes, founder and CEO of AdGooroo, couldn’t say how many times the top keywords were clicked on each month.

Share

{ 0 comments }

SearchEngineWatch.com is reporting that Google is sponsoring a contest with a grand prize of $25,000 of cable television advertising.  Contestants create a 30 second or 60 second spot and upload it to the YouTube channel “TV for all contest.” You can even make the ad for free using SpotMixer.com.  The deadline for submission is October 5, 2009.  Viewers will vote, and 3 winners will be announced October 30, 2009.

This appears to be a good way for Google to call attention to the TV ad service it now offers through its AdWords program.  A MediaPost article reports that Google has teamed with SpotMixer to allow advertisers to create video ads to be displayed on the Google Content Network.  SpotMixer’s platform automatically converts an advertiser’s existing AdWords text ad into a tailored video ad within the advertiser’s AdWords account.  Earlier this year, SpotMixer launched a self-serve video ad creation service for Google AdWords customers to produce and distribute cable TV ads via Google TV Ads.

Lawyers who have been tempted to dip their toes into the TV advertising pool now have a way of giving it a try on a limited budget.  But the chance of a lawyer ad winning the $25,000 grand prize?  I’m pretty skeptical about that.

Share

{ 0 comments }

Mediapost reports that Google will launch AdSense for mobile on Wednesday.  Mobile content developers will be able to insert a small snippet of code into their pages; this will tell Google where to display an ad.  The ad targeting is contextual, similar to targeting that exists for AdSense partners.

A Google spokesperson said Google is also experimenting on ways to allow advertisers to bid for ad placement on specific applications.  Anybody want to buy an ad when an iPhone user Googles the location of the local jail?

Share

{ Comments on this entry are closed }

The law firm of Susman Godfey LLP said Friday it had received preliminary approval of a proposed $20 million class action settlement filed on behalf of AdWords advertisers who were allegedly tricked by Google into paying for ads they didn’t intend to buy.  This news comes from a Sacramento Business Journal article.

The class action lawsuit is pending in the Federal District Court of the Northern District of California, San Jose Division. Final approval of the settlement will be considered on Sept. 14.

As any AdWords user knows, Google charges advertisers when users “click” on one of their ads.  When the advertiser creates an ad, he or she tells Google the maximum they are willing to pay per click.  But according to lawyers for the class, advertisers can find themselves paying for ads they didn’t intend to buy.  According to Susman Godfrey:

“During this process, users encounter two adjacent boxes. Into the first, customers enter the amount they wish to pay per click of an ad displayed on Google.com. The second box is marked ‘optional.’ Into this box, a user can enter the amount they would be willing to pay per click of an ad appearing on a third-party Web page. But leaving the box blank does not prevent ads from appearing on third-party sites,” the law firm said.

Google “places the ads on third-party sites anyway. And users are automatically charged per click based on the amount they entered into the first box. This suit arises from the fact that both actions occur without the user being informed,” the firm added.

Share

{ 0 comments }

One of the reservations I’ve heard some lawyers express about pay-per-click (PPC) advertising is that you don’t know who is clicking on your ads.  If you’re paying $85 for someone to click on your mesothelioma ad to visit your site, is that person a mesothelioma victim or a competitor?  Now comes a study from U.S. based Click Forensics that says the average click fraud rate of PPC advertisements appearing on search engine content networks, including Google AdSense and the Yahoo Publisher Network, was 28.2%, up from 27.1% in the previous quarter.  See article here.

Note that this figure applies to the “content” networks, such as ads that appear on blogs and news sites using Google’s AdSense program.  There is a built-in incentive for the publishers of the sites to engage in fraudulent clicking, as they share in the revenues from each click.  The article does not give an estimate of the number of fraudulent clicks on Google’s and Yahoo!’s search engines.

One user of PPC ads suggests that you factor the fraud rate into your calculations.  Tony Jewell , chief technical officer of job search engine Workcircle, advises factoring in a degree of risk and focusing on return on investment. “If 20% of clicks are invalid, are the other 80% good enough for it not to matter?” he said. “If the traffic sends customers who convert, and hence is profitable, then we’re happy.”

Share

{ 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.

  1. Advertise Online.
  2. Invest in a professionally designed and developed web site.
  3. “Consumerize” your web site.
  4. 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."]
  5. [click to continue…]

Share

{ 0 comments }

Bloggers who take compensation for recommending a product may be held liable for any false statements they make about the product, if the Federal Trade Commission follows through with its proposed plan to start regulating viral marketing and blogs, according to Ad Age. The article says the regulations would also apply to content people post on social-network sites such as Facebook.

One of the things I found most surprising in the article is the amount of money spent on this type of marketing.  The article says product marketers, including Microsoft, Ford and Pepsi, spend billions on word-of-mouth and social media. PQ Media projects that marketers will spend $3.7 billion on word-of-mouth marketing in 2011.

The FTC will vote on the proposed regulations this summer, after a period for public comments. So, the FTC wants guerilla marketing to be factual?  I don’t have any problem with that.

Share

{ 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…]

Share

{ 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…]

Share

{ Comments on this entry are closed }