As reported by Larry Bodine on Law Marketing Portal, in a very thorough analysis of a judge's use of social media, the Supreme Court of Ohio's disciplinary board has issued an advisory opinion outlining some of the ethical implications involved.
- To comply with Jud. Cond. Rule 1.2., a judge must maintain dignity in every comment, photograph, and other information shared on the social networking site.
- To comply with Jud. Cond. Rule 2.4(C), a judge must not foster social networking interactions with individuals or organizations if such communications erode confidence in the independence of judicial decision making.
- To comply with Jud. Cond. Rule 2.9 (A), a judge should not make comments on a social networking site about any matters pending before the judge – not to a party, not to a counsel for a party, not to anyone.
- To comply with Jud. Cond. Rule 2.9 (C), a judge should not view a party’s or witnesses’ pages on a social networking site and should not use social networking sites to obtain information regarding the matter before the judge.
- To comply with Jud. Cond. Rule 2.10, a judge should avoid making any comments on a social networking site about a pending or impending matter in any court.
- To comply with Jud. Cond. Rule 2.11 (A)(1), a judge should disqualify himself or herself from a proceeding when the judge’s social networking relationship with a lawyer creates bias or prejudice concerning the lawyer or party. There is no bright-line rule: not all social relationships, online or otherwise, require a judge disqualification.
- To comply with Jud. Cond. Rule 3.10, a judge may not give legal advice to others on a social networking site.
To me, this is a opinion represents a core understanding that social media and social networking tools are just that, tools. While they provide a new means by which to communicate, they do not require an entirely new set of regulations dedicated specifically to social media.
I have always thought that attempts to create new regulations for the legal profession's use of social media and other online marketing techniques is analogous to creating a separate set of rules for television, radio, phone, email, etc. The truth is, that the existing ethical rules are applicable to all forms of communication including social media and other online marketing and networking sites.
The idea of creating a separate set of rules for social media, to me, reflects a lack of understanding of the nature of these new technologies. While there is no doubt that the use of social media by judges and lawyers should be subject to ethical regulations (just as every other form of communication should be), developing a unique set of new rules for each form of communication is likely to lead to confusion, unnecessary compliance difficulties, and is more likely to restrict the public's access to legal information rather than protect it from false of misleading information.
Here's a recent Google SERP for "๐๐ต๐ผ ๐ฎ๐ฟ๐ฒ ๐๐ต๐ฒ ๐ฏ๐ฒ๐๐ ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐ฟ ๐ฎ๐ฐ๐ฐ๐ถ๐ฑ๐ฒ๐ป๐ ๐น๐ฎ๐๐๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ ๐ถ๐ป ๐ฝ๐ต๐ถ๐น๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ฒ๐น๐ฝ๐ต๐ถ๐ฎ." Ads? โLSAs? โLocal Pack? โLinks? โ ๐ท AI Overview? โ 6 firms listed. Only one tiny ๐. Click the ๐ฆ๐ต๐ผ๐ ๐บ๐ผ๐ฟ๐ฒ button? ๐ฌ๐ผ๐ ๐ด๐ฒ๐: Here's a more detailed look at some of these firms: THE PEARCE LAW FIRM, P.C.Edith Pearce, […]
On April 22, 2025, Google sent an email updating Local Services Ads Additional Terms for Providers: Subject: Action required: important updates to Local Service Ads Additional Terms Many people are arguing that lawyers cannot participate in Local Services Ads, as this would constitute a per se violation of the Rules of Professional Conduct related to […]
Conrad and I recently joined Zack at Lawyerist to record a conversation about AI and marketing. You might think that we spend the whole time on how lawyers can use AI to publish content. You'd be wrong. While AI can certainly support publishing, there are many more interesting ways to use it in legal marketing. […]
As more legal services consumers turn to ChatGPT for local law firm recommendations, a fascinating intersection between AI, search, and maps unfolds. While Google remains the undisputed leader in local business data, ChatGPT is increasingly becoming an entry point for searchers seeking legal representation. But hereโs the kicker: instead of keeping users within its ecosystem, […]
When law firms contact us, they usually want to talk: โข PPC Ads โข SEO Rankings โข Lead Generation Very few want to talk: โข Brand โข Trust & Recognition โข Emotional Connection Admittedly, much of this concerns that AttorneySync is known for lead generation across those common digital channels. But even when we start […]
According to an October 2024 study by SE Ranking: "The legal niche triggers the highest percentage of AIOs (77.67%). The average number of links matched between the AI Overview resources and the top 20 search results was 6.49 for legal topics. AI Overviews for legal topics most frequently link to NYCourts.gov (114 links), YouTube.com (48 […]
I'm grateful for my friend, Charley Mann of Law firm Alchemy. If you're a lawyer, subscribe to his Free Email List. In a recent email, Charley calls out bad guru advice on hiring: "Trying to execute a major SEO improvement? You need to find people who will help you, instead of trying to DIY it […]
If youโve spent any time on LinkedIn, youโve likely seen posts from law firm SEO experts showing off charts with an โup and to the rightโ trajectory. These screenshots, often pulled from tools like Semrush or Ahrefs, are meant to signal SEO success. And itโs not just the agencies celebratingโ๐น๐ฎ๐ ๐ณ๐ถ๐ฟ๐บ๐ ๐๐ต๐ฎ๐ ๐ต๐ฎ๐๐ฒ ๐ต๐ถ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐ฑ ๐๐ต๐ฒ๐บ […]
Meh, links! All things being equal, links still tend to move the dial more than any other factor in legal SERPs. Maybe links are having a diminishing impact internet-wide. But in my experience, quality links, especially relevant links (both topically and geographically), tend to improve law firm visibility in search more than most everything else. […]
