Comments on: Internet Marketers and Other Scoundrels http://blog.bennettandbennett.com/2010/01/internet-marketers-and-other-scoundrels.html the tao of criminal-defense trial lawyering Fri, 10 Feb 2012 17:39:20 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Chris Olbekson http://blog.bennettandbennett.com/2010/01/internet-marketers-and-other-scoundrels.html/comment-page-1#comment-13063 Chris Olbekson Thu, 04 Feb 2010 04:52:55 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2010/01/internet-marketers-and-other-scoundrels.html#comment-13063 The real estate industry has the same problem. There are tons of companies that work the same way as Findlaw that sell pre written content that realtors put on their blogs to make them look like experts. One of the other problems is that even if you are paying for custom written content your still going to end up with bits and pieces (whole paragraphs) that have already been published on other blogs. Google's crawlers can detect duplicate content and will penalize and drop you in the rankings defeating the whole purpose. I can't believe Findllaw charges upwards of $6,000 per year for websites. I recently built a site for a law firm for less than half of that and it ranks better than most findlaw blogs. The real estate industry has the same problem. There are tons of companies that work the same way as Findlaw that sell pre written content that realtors put on their blogs to make them look like experts. One of the other problems is that even if you are paying for custom written content your still going to end up with bits and pieces (whole paragraphs) that have already been published on other blogs. Google’s crawlers can detect duplicate content and will penalize and drop you in the rankings defeating the whole purpose.

I can’t believe Findllaw charges upwards of $6,000 per year for websites. I recently built a site for a law firm for less than half of that and it ranks better than most findlaw blogs.

]]> By: Tony Vitz http://blog.bennettandbennett.com/2010/01/internet-marketers-and-other-scoundrels.html/comment-page-1#comment-13058 Tony Vitz Wed, 03 Feb 2010 12:58:23 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2010/01/internet-marketers-and-other-scoundrels.html#comment-13058 Why do we really care? You know it bothers me Mark, but what are the reasons? It may be different for each of us. Why does it bother us? I think it is taking advantage of a person that needs help. Some lawyers actually believe the words they spew out Why do we really care? You know it bothers me Mark, but what are the reasons? It may be different for each of us. Why does it bother us? I think it is taking advantage of a person that needs help. Some lawyers actually believe the words they spew out

]]> By: Brad Frye http://blog.bennettandbennett.com/2010/01/internet-marketers-and-other-scoundrels.html/comment-page-1#comment-13037 Brad Frye Sun, 31 Jan 2010 22:53:42 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2010/01/internet-marketers-and-other-scoundrels.html#comment-13037 Hey! What's this about A/C duct cleaning being a scam? Is it? Brad Frye Lindeman, Alvarado & Frye Hey! What’s this about A/C duct cleaning being a scam?
Is it?
Brad Frye
Lindeman, Alvarado & Frye

]]> By: Mark Bennett http://blog.bennettandbennett.com/2010/01/internet-marketers-and-other-scoundrels.html/comment-page-1#comment-13031 Mark Bennett Sun, 31 Jan 2010 03:23:43 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2010/01/internet-marketers-and-other-scoundrels.html#comment-13031 It may not be different than the newsletter of old. If the writing is represented as the firm's work, it needs to be the firm's work, or it's deceptive. I don't believe this idea is new with the advent of the Internet. If the ghostblogger were a junior associate who also wrote briefs and drafted motions, that wouldn't be as deceptive—the clients, choosing the lawyer based in part on her thought processes as evinced by "her" (written by the associate) blog, would actually be getting what they thought they were getting (though not exactly the way they thought). It may not be different than the newsletter of old. If the writing is represented as the firm’s work, it needs to be the firm’s work, or it’s deceptive. I don’t believe this idea is new with the advent of the Internet.

If the ghostblogger were a junior associate who also wrote briefs and drafted motions, that wouldn’t be as deceptive—the clients, choosing the lawyer based in part on her thought processes as evinced by “her” (written by the associate) blog, would actually be getting what they thought they were getting (though not exactly the way they thought).

]]> By: Windypundit http://blog.bennettandbennett.com/2010/01/internet-marketers-and-other-scoundrels.html/comment-page-1#comment-13030 Windypundit Sun, 31 Jan 2010 02:09:33 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2010/01/internet-marketers-and-other-scoundrels.html#comment-13030 If Jenni Buchanan wants to protect her clients from whatever harmful effects your link may have, she has one option that doesn't require a favor from you: She can remove the testimonials from the page. If Jenni Buchanan wants to protect her clients from whatever harmful effects your link may have, she has one option that doesn’t require a favor from you: She can remove the testimonials from the page.

]]> By: shg http://blog.bennettandbennett.com/2010/01/internet-marketers-and-other-scoundrels.html/comment-page-1#comment-13029 shg Sun, 31 Jan 2010 01:42:33 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2010/01/internet-marketers-and-other-scoundrels.html#comment-13029 Mark Merenda mixed up in yet another ethics scandal? What a surprise. I wonder if it's part of his curriculum at Solo Practice University. Mark Merenda mixed up in yet another ethics scandal? What a surprise. I wonder if it’s part of his curriculum at Solo Practice University.

]]> By: David Sugerman http://blog.bennettandbennett.com/2010/01/internet-marketers-and-other-scoundrels.html/comment-page-1#comment-13028 David Sugerman Sun, 31 Jan 2010 00:46:04 +0000 http://bennettandbennett.com/blog/2010/01/internet-marketers-and-other-scoundrels.html#comment-13028 I've been lurking lightly through this discussion here and there across various blawgs and Twitter. We usually agree on many things. And while I share your sneer on a lot of the web marketing crapfest, this one seems somewhat grayer to me. How is the ghostblawger different from the law firm's PR service that writes its newsletter of old? And as someone (Antonin?) pointed out, how is it different from the senior partner taking credit for the article written by the bright young law student? Or the multi-million dollar verdict in which the young lawyer who did the lion's share of the work disappears from case reports and media coverage (me in the 1980s)? Maybe the difference is about review and editorial control. Maybe as to work authored or undertaken by the young lawyers (article/big verdict), it's professional prerogatives, and that's different in kind? Don't get me wrong. The ridicule is well-deserved. It's hard to take seriously any twit lawyer who believes that the Google and social media is the road to fame and riches. Still, I imagine you and others who actually practice law, represent people, and try cases get the same pissed off feeling I do when I see an inept or inexperienced lawyer advertising on TV or the internet for cases that they can't competently handle. I suppose it comes down to specifics? I’ve been lurking lightly through this discussion here and there across various blawgs and Twitter. We usually agree on many things. And while I share your sneer on a lot of the web marketing crapfest, this one seems somewhat grayer to me.

How is the ghostblawger different from the law firm’s PR service that writes its newsletter of old? And as someone (Antonin?) pointed out, how is it different from the senior partner taking credit for the article written by the bright young law student? Or the multi-million dollar verdict in which the young lawyer who did the lion’s share of the work disappears from case reports and media coverage (me in the 1980s)?

Maybe the difference is about review and editorial control. Maybe as to work authored or undertaken by the young lawyers (article/big verdict), it’s professional prerogatives, and that’s different in kind?

Don’t get me wrong. The ridicule is well-deserved. It’s hard to take seriously any twit lawyer who believes that the Google and social media is the road to fame and riches. Still, I imagine you and others who actually practice law, represent people, and try cases get the same pissed off feeling I do when I see an inept or inexperienced lawyer advertising on TV or the internet for cases that they can’t competently handle.

I suppose it comes down to specifics?

]]>