Reporters read blogs and law firm client alerts. Who knew?? Actually, I did. As do most legal marketers who blog. But, most lawyers don’t believe us, so, take the word of Los Angeles Daily Journal editor David Houston:

Again, the goal is to spur deeper reporting. We should be on cusp of our beats. By the time a story appears in the Los Angeles Times, the San Francisco Chronicle or the Wall Street Journal, it is usually too late for us. Read blogs and law firm client alerts and obscure trade publications. Talk to lots of sources on the telephone and in person. Share good ideas with colleagues. This helps us use our finite resources for the collective good of the newspaper. It is the thing that helps us compete with large publications. (emphasis added)

Oh, and get to work at a decent time, lol.

I don’t think that having a personal brand is a “big lie” to quote @ScottGreenfield’s recent post, The Brand War. He was responding to this statement of mine from Earn your reputation; build your personal brand:

“Your personal brand is what you stand for. It’s based on your reputation. It’s what you’re known for in the marketplace. It’s what differentiates you from your competition. It’s what comes to mind when someone says your name.”

A brand cannot be built on fabrications. If the insides of a can of Coca-Cola are 7-Up, then it’s not a Coke, no matter what the can or bottle says. Same thing goes with an attorney. I don’t care how many directories you are listed in, how many quotes in the WSJ. I don’t care about your cover story in American Lawyer … if you cannot deliver on the promise of your reputation; if you’re a crappy attorney; if you’re really a corporate M&A attorney, but trying to “rebrand” yourself as a bankruptcy attorney in the down market, then your personal “brand” is not valid. I like this definition from Persuasive Brands:

Any brand is a set of perceptions and images that represent a company, product or service. While many people refer to a brand as a logo, tag line or audio jingle, a brand is actually much larger. A brand is the essence or promise of what will be delivered or experienced. Importantly, brands enable a buyer to easily identify the offerings of a particular company [OR LAWYER]. Brands are generally developed over time through:

  • Advertisements containing consistent messaging
  • Recommendations from friends, family members or colleagues
  • Interactions with a company and its representatives
  • Real-life experiences using a product or service (generally considered the most important element of establishing a brand)

Once developed, brands provide an umbrella under which many different products [AND SERVICES] can be offered–providing a company [OR LAWYER/LAW FIRM] tremendous economic leverage and strategic advantage in generating awareness of their offerings in the marketplace.

In other words: A lawyer’s personal brand is the assurance to the client that the legal services that they are purchasing (the “bull dog” trial lawyer, the “bet the farm” litigation team, the go-to “hotel lawyer”) are actually what, and who, they say they are. Now, how can a lawyer “build” this brand … it starts with what you already know, and then you add in what you want to be known for, and then the work that you want, and what people think and know about you, and THEN you focus your actions behind this, and this is HOW you BUILD your personal brand.

  • If you want to be know as an the “green attorney,” then don’t waste your time writing articles on constitutional nuances of the death penalty.
  • Don’t speak before bar associations if you’re clients, potential clients, referrals sources and influencers (oh, my) are all attending industry-based conferences.
  • Don’t show up in a pin-stripe suit when your clients are “dressed up” in jeans (not saying don’t dress professionally, just nix the tie and formal suit, jacket and open collar shirt are fine).
  • Your web bio, blog, events you speak at, articles you write, should all point towards the clients, and work, that you want, based on your experiences and what you already know.

You get the idea. Begin with WHO YOU ARE and WHAT YOU DO, and build from there. But how do you get “there”?? We marketers will come in and ask probing questions (here’s a decent list of 20 questions to begin with … ). We’ll read what clients say about you in response to client service interviews and conference evaluations. We will “listen” to the conversations about you that are taking place on-line … or around the water cooler. We’ll evaluate your stats to see how people are finding you on Google, or what they’re reading on your blog. We will then bring these things together to FOCUS and BUILD your brand. A brand is not an illusion, fabrication or lie. Branding is not a tag line (which are all pretty much the same and stupid). And branding is most definitely NOT a logo. Branding is, however, the “packaging” around what is already true. If you don’t like the term “branding” because that is too “marketing speak,” then don’t use the term. However, to dismiss branding as the “big lie” is to give your competition the edge.

Really, my life isn’t so pathetic that I am stopping everything to spread the word, that, according to a tweet from AP Style Book today:

[They] are changing Web site to website. This appears on Stylebook Online today and in the 2010 book next month.

That’s right. You read it here. Oh, yeah!! There’s no more debate: It’s a website. One word. Lowercase. Woot Woot! I’ll have to agree with Mashable on this one, though:

We’re pretty ecstatic about the change, and hold our collective breath for other possible updates, such as changing “e-mail” to “email.”

More often than not I agree with Kevin O’Keefe, but not today. I think Kevin’s off in his recent post, Telling lawyers to build a personal brand may be a big mistake:

I’ve presented at law schools, bar societies, bar associations, and association conferences of legal professionals talking about building one’s personal brand. I’ve talked about the importance of creating a personal brand – and of making yourself indispensable by doing so. I’ve talked about the importance of using blogging and other forms of social media as tools in building one’s personal brand. I was as passionate about the topic as I was talking with a jury in a closing argument. But as with juries, I often received a hollow response from some of the folks I was speaking to. Maybe it was my treatment of lawyers like they were Cialis – something Eli Lilly and Company works hard to brand. Rather than talking of personal branding, I’d actually be more comfortable categorizing the below practices for lawyers as expressions of humanity and integrity, as opposed to forms of ‘branding.’

  • Build a reputation by doing good work.
  • Put that work where others can judge its value.
  • Contribute to the success of others, and credit others generously for their contributions to your success.
  • Never promote for its own sake.

I’ve learned a ton from Doc Searls over the years. Today it’s “Building trust and maintaining a reputation matter. Calling both ‘branding’ is a categorical error.”

I don’t disagree with Kevin’s four bullet points, but I will argue that building and maintaining a personal brand is important. Lawyers come to marketers daily with the request to “differentiate” them from their competition. Usually this is impossible because their competition also graduated top of their class from a similarly ranked university, top of their class from an Ivy League law school, and are AV-rated, Best and Super-duperist with their competition who practice law across the hall, down the street, or on the other side of the country. Having a personal brand is what differentiates you from your competition. Your personal brand is what you stand for. It’s based on your reputation. It’s what you’re known for in the marketplace. It’s what comes to mind when someone says your name. We all have a brand. We all have a reputation to maintain and manage. However, where reputations are earned, a brand can be built.

Eleanor Roosevelt once said, “Happiness is not a goal; it is a by-product.” It had me thinking about my life and how happy I am. Like many people, that hasn’t always been the case, so I started wondering, in the light of Eleanor Roosevelt’s sentiments, what have I done to generate this much happiness? To begin with, my life is full. A couple years ago I took a Sharpie to my life and cleared my calendar of useless activities, especially useless television, and began to fill it with activities worthy of my time, and with valued relationships.

  • Some of these relationships are virtual, we’ve never met, but we share online all the time.
  • Some of these were old relationships renewed.
  • Some of these were professional relationships that became personal.
  • Some of these were personal relationships that became intimate.

And then there are the activities. There’s The Legal Watercooler, which has not only branded my personally, but has allowed me to participate in a conversation with people around the world. It has led to speaking opportunities, and has opened a passion for social media and social networking. Then there’s the Girl Scouts, where I serve as troop leader for a multi-level troop  which includes both my daughters. Yes, I moan and groan the first and third Tuesday of the month, and don’t get me started on the cases of cookies that are stacked in my hallway for a month every year, but by the time I am done getting hugged and loved by 12 girls ranging in age from 5-9, I can’t help but feel blessed. There’s my daily meditation, weekly yoga, and daily visits to the gym at lunch time. Happiness does begin with our core being. But a lot of my “extra” time these past couple week s has been spent filling out my supplemental application to become a commissioner for California’s first Citizens Redistricting Commission:

Every 10 years, after the federal census, California and every state in the country, must redraw the boundaries of its legislative and other political districts to reflect the new population data. How these boundaries are drawn affects how people are represented. In California, the process of redrawing the boundaries—redistricting—was a duty of state elected officials. But when voters passed Proposition 11 (the Voters FIRST Act) in the November 2008 general election, responsibility for redrawing the legislative and Board of Equalization district lines transferred to the people in the form of a new Citizens Redistricting Commission. What is the Citizens Redistricting Commission? California’s first Citizens Redistricting Commission (Commission) is a new 14-member Commission charged with redrawing California’s Senate, Assembly and State Board of Equalization districts based on information gathered during the 2010 census. The Commission must draw the districts in conformity with strict, nonpartisan rules designed to create districts of relatively equal population that will provide fair representation for all Californians.

I don’t know if I’ll make the commission, but I took the “why not me” attitude and completed my application to the best of my ability, which included the solicitation of letters of recommendation. I would like to take this moment to express my gratitude to the following people who wrote me letters of recommendation: Steve Barrett, Jayne Navarre, Nat Slavin, Cheryl Bame and Russell Lawson. I thank you for your kind words, but, more importantly, I thank you for your examples as professionals within our industry, your mentorship, and your valued friendships! So, Coolerites, where does your slice of happiness rest?

I can’t believe I have to say this again: Politics, social networking and business development DON’T MIX!! Never. Ever. Ever. I don’t care if you’re talking about saving puppies and unicorns, I caution you to self-edit what you say on Facebook, Twitter, or even on locked-down message boards. Why? According to the latest Gallup Poll on Party Affiliation this country is pretty evenly spit politically. What does this mean?? It means that anytime you mention politics in a social media or networking environment you risk alienating 46-54% of your target market, and you might never know it. I’m talking about, oh, you know, your clients, your potential clients, your referral sources, your influencers, your employers, potential employers, conference organizers, reporters, etc. Why do people continue to do this?? According to Jayne Navarre, it sometimes comes down to what might be a false sense of “trust” earned:

The social media space, in many regards, is a fertile ground for influencers and trust agents, however they must earn it. (skip) [Jayne believes that one earns that positioning] not by broadcasting (shouting) antagonistic messages, but rather through thoughtful contribution and community appropriate discussions.

Am I saying not to discuss politics and other “controversial” issues within your personal and professional (social) networks. No. You just need to do it one-on-one and discretely with people you know share your thoughts and opinions. Let’s bring it back to “real world” situations, such as around the water cooler at work. I have many a time been chatting politics with like-minded colleagues to see someone quietly and uncomfortably grab a cup of coffee or glass of water and walk away. We know that they do not agree with our political points. But in this scenario, we can see the non-verbal clues that let us know what actions to take to remedy the situation. At a cocktail party or reception it is easy to see your prospect “check out” when the conversation turns passionate and heated. You might see a client stand up to “get a drink” and never come back. Lesson learned. At the recent LMA conference, I saw people get up and walk out of the conference hall when the key-note speaker introduced the “non-political” topic of global warming. The displeasure of this group also made it onto Twitter in direct messages with like-minded colleagues, and via the conference hashtag. I was amazed at how many people thought those offended were being too “sensitive,” since “he didn’t offend me.” I would caution you to always keep in mind these unique challenges when it comes to politics and social networking:

  • You cannot see the faces of those you have offended, and therefore apologize or alter the direction of the conversation.
  • You will never know that you have lost your position of “influencer” or “trust agent.”
  • Once you post something within a social media or networking environment, it is there forever. You cannot take it back or erase it.

Jayne’s personal experiences sum things  up well for the point of this discussion, as well as provides constructive advice:

Finally, while Facebook is a more casual environment and there are many opportunities to speak out on your political positions, anyone that does so should understand that there are consequences. In my network some Friends are passionate about their politics but deliver their messages privately to their appropriate Lists or specific individuals. On the other hand, I have some attorney “Friends” in my network who wear their political passions on their sleeve and whether I agree with them or not, it is offensive to me. Further, they have no clue who they are offending, and maybe that’s their point. When Facebook comments appear on my wall that offend me, I immediately “LIST” that person to my “Limited View” List which has very tight settings. If they do that on Twitter, I dump em.

Personally, I think twice (or ten times) before I reply to a political thread on Facebook or Twitter. Many time I have really debated whether or not to become a fan of someone, or join a political group. If I decide to fan or join the group,  because I really want to follow the message, I will often times immediately delete the “activity” from my Wall. As for adding my voice to a political discussion, there are times that I will do so privately, or, when on a public wall, I will always maintain my respect for the other side’s position, and make certain that I stick to facts, avoiding passionate rhetoric or attacks. What I have found is that I am able to have these types of conversations with friends from “across the aisle” which allow us to deepen our relationships, without alienation. All of this being said, “You should not be allowed to claim diplomatic immunity when you’re a low-level a** hole.”

California Supreme Court in San FranciscoThere’s a case before the California Supreme Court, Simpson Strong-Tie Co. Inc. v. Gore, which could give lawyer ads protection as free speech.

The contested ad, which you can view here (p. 17), is, well, quite boring and innocuous, but that’s a whole other discussion.

The questions at hand is: is the lawyer’s ad considered commercial speech, and therefore “isn’t protected by the state’s anti-SLAPP statute,” or is it free speech and therefore Constitutionally protected?

[The ad] — which was two sentences long — was composed by Los Gatos class action lawyer Pierce Gore and appeared in early 2006 in the San Jose Mercury News and the Los Gatos Weekly Times. It advised wood deck owners to contact Gore if they had built their decks after Jan. 1, 2004, with galvanized screws manufactured by three companies, including Pleasanton-based Simpson Strong-Tie Co. Inc., because they might be entitled to monetary compensation or repairs.

Simpson — the world’s largest manufacturer of screws for use in wood-frame construction — sued Gore, alleging defamation and false advertising, but Gore filed an anti-SLAPP motion, accusing Simpson of trying to stifle his free-speech rights. A superior court judge granted the motion and in 2008 San Jose’s 6th District Court of Appeal affirmed, creating a conflict with Los Angeles’ 2nd District.

As a legal marketer I’ve always had concerns about the restraints on lawyer advertising where the First Amendment is concerned, and the arguments in this case will have wide-spread implications.

[Jon] Eisenberg contends that the ad is unprotected commercial speech because it contained representations Gore made about his business and statements he made in the course of delivering his legal services.

But Thomas Burke, a First Amendment specialist and partner in Davis Wright Tremaine‘s San Francisco office who represented Gore, disagreed.

The commercial speech exemption to the anti-SLAPP law, he argued, applies only to “representations of fact” made about the operations, goods or services of the speaker or a business competitor. There was no statement of fact in the ad, he noted, and it did not pertain to Gore or his competitors.

Burke also mockingly said the ad could have won the Hall of Fame award for “benign” advertising and was based on warnings in the news.

“There was a consumer alert before Gore issued his notice,” he said. “There was an investigation by the Contra Costa County district attorney’s office.”

I, for one, am rooting for the First Amendment here and will keep an eye out for the decision in the case, which is due within 90 days.

Disclaimer: As always, I am not a lawyer and I don’t even pretend to play one at work or in bars. These are just my humble opinions.

I know that branding + law firms has always been a tough sell. But branding + consumer products is BIG business. Corporations, retailers, clothing manufacturers, restaurant chains, food & beverage manufacturers, sports franchises will spend billions of dollars developing and defending their brands … and they spend a lot of that money hiring lawyers to trademark, patent, purchase, defend and build those brands. So I had to chuckle when I read David Lat’s post Day Pitney Lawyers: No Coke for You! What would your firm do to snag a client?

Switching sodas to support a client seems a bit… silly. And, given Pepsi’s inferiority as a beverage to Coke, this imposes a real hardship on Day Pitney lawyers. There’s a reason why bartenders or waiters apologetically ask, in response to requests for a Coke, “Is Pepsi okay?” But still, it’s a nice gesture by Day Pitney. And every new customer counts. Maybe DP will represent the “tipping point” in Pepsi’s war with Coke.

It’s not about sending a few sheckles to Pepsi; it’s a nod to your client that you understand the value of their brand. Hey, it’s a really simple concept: if you want to represent Pepsi you can’t drink Coke. If you were the underdog brand to Coke, you’d expect EVERY VENDOR, including your law firm, to drink Pepsi products at work, and at home. In fact, if you want to win the FedEx RFP, I suggest that you don’t send the response via UPS … I don’t care what your corporate rate is. And when you go to the Gucci beauty contest, it’s okay to charge a new purse to the marketing department. Just make sure that your kids play with it for a couple hours to break it in. Oh, and you might want to leave the Gap jeans at the hotel when you go in to meet the Levi’s folks, I don’t care how comfy they are, and besides, you wore a jacket over the label. They can identify their products, and their competitors! And I really suggest you empty the Hershey Kisses from the secretary’s candy jar before the Nestle clients come in for a visit. And, by the way, they own Arrowhead, so go ahead and enjoy that Perrier, or their chief competitor,  San Pellegrino for that matter. And, if you’re throwing out the opening pitch for the Nationals home game opener, you might want to leave the Sox cap in your pocket. As lay people, we might see this protection of one’s brand as silly. But when your brand is valued in the BILLIONS OF DOLLARS it no longer seems so silly. It’s BIG BUSINESS … and, isn’t that what we legal marketers are always preaching: KNOW AND UNDERSTAND YOUR CLIENTS’ BUSINESS AND INDUSTRY. That includes their brands! All of them. So, clean out your closets, refrigerators and candy dishes and do a little shopping and proudly support your clients’ brands.

I could do a whole “hmmm, here are my thoughts on this,” but, come on … just click on the link and read Kara’s interview with Chris Brogan …

Trust Agents: Using the Web to Build Influence, Improve Reputation, and Earn Trust by Chris Brogan and Julien Smith is an incredibly straight forward guide for anyone communicating regularly with a large group of people on the internet who give what we say enough credence to follow, friend or quote what we have to say with some regularity. The book is chock full of useful information and mirrored so many of the experiences I had been going through as a public relations legal marketer over the last two years, that I ended up taking some very copious notes as I read. By the time I finished, my copy was surrounded by a rainbow of sticky notes, and I  was compelled to send my top ten questions to Chris. Chris was gracious enough to respond.

I saw a question posed recently on a closed network asking why it’s so difficult to get lawyers to purchase a specific service product. The specifics of the situation aside, I did start thinking, “why is it so hard to sell a product to lawyers.” Short answer: “Because they are lawyers.” First of all, lawyers, for the most part, are skeptical people and risk adverse. Whether you’re trying to sell them light-up pens, a redistribution service for their blog content, or a new Website, the lawyers will come at it with “why?” and “who else is doing it?” before they ever question the price. I have rarely met a lawyer who is willing to risk being the “first” to do anything, and, when they are, well, they’re not your typical lawyer. For any lawyer, whether in-house counsel or senior partner at a private law firm, they purchase products from those they know, like and trust. Here are a few suggestions/comments I have (Disclaimer: Although inspired in part by true incidents, the following scenarios are fictional and do not depict any actual person, event, product or law firm that I may or may not have ever worked at):

  1. If we don’t know you, we don’t care what you think. When you cold-call us, out of the blue, with a great product and service … if you do not have a relationship with us already, we don’t care. And, if I haven’t returned your call after three messages, I probably won’t.
  2. Know who we are. Don’t call me or my firm to sell me a service that we don’t need. Check out our website and blogs.  Google us. My current firm is a boutique. I don’t care to get in front of every CEO in the Fortune 1000. I want to get in front of the legal service decision makers within a certain SIC/NAIC code. And while we’re at it …  if you had read my personal blog you would have known that I’m not interested in your ghost writing/ blogging services.
  3. Budgets are tight. I don’t care if we’re in the middle of a recession, or boom times. The budget for the marketing department spend is always tight. Just how it goes. Don’t call me in July to sell me something for this year … odds are, if we’re not on track to hit our PPP, my budget will be frozen. As a former managing partner told me: “Consider your budget a wish list.”
  4. It costs HOW MUCH??? Great product, priced poorly won’t do, especially for smaller firms. I understand that you’re used to selling to AmLaw 100 firms. We’re not. Get your pricing in line with our firm’s revenues/budgets.
  5. Don’t be an ass. Sorry, but don’t try and slip around me and go directly to my partners to sell them some vanity product. Don’t call — or better yet, post on Twitter or your blog — to tell me how crappy my website SEO is,  how poorly written a recent blog post is, how you could print a much better brochure than what we distributed at a conference, all in the name of selling me your services.  Use the opportunity to build trust (and send me a PRIVATE or direct message)  “Hey, Heather, your link is dead” or “Hey, Heather, that sentence sounds funky … why don’t you try this?”

And remember this: I’m not going to risk my job and reputation on you. I’m not going to bring you into my firm to present, sell or speak to my attorneys if I don’t TRUST that you will make ME look good.