Are legal blogs advertising? Should they be regulated as advertising?

I don’t think so, but boy do I have a bias!

The Argument: States want to protect their consumers from lawyer advertisements disguised as editorial content.
Well, I can understand that. Just like they regulate the little ads in magazines and newspapers masquerading as actual news stories with the -5 font “Advertisement” disclaimer. I was really thinking about buying some plates from the Franklin Mint once. And another time, I really thought that scientists had made a breakthrough discovery, and that if I bought a copper wristband, it would increase my energy, make me much more intelligent, and seem both warm, witty, and kind to women. But I saw that one little word, and came to my senses.

Okay, I’m being sarcastic. I apologize.

Could blogs be considered advertising? Absolutely. I would be dishonest to try to ignore the fact that the goal of most law blogging, in the end, is acquisition of clients. If the goal in blogging is to establish expertise, it follows that that expertise is going to result in business. If the goal is to get the firm’s name “out there,” the same applies.

But should every blog post be submitted to a disciplinary committee for review? I don’t see how that could happen.

One of the strengths of blogging is that it is immediate. A story breaks, and bloggers are on it. People come to blogs because of their frequently updated content. And authors can post said content because it is so easy and effortless. New rules and regulations would take away the one of the main reasons for the popularity of blogs in the first place.

But another question comes to mind: How do you identify what is advertising and what is not?

On this site, I’ve compiled Ethics Rules on Legal Advertising and Marketing for all 50 states. Looking through them, I have read many rules on where a lawyer or firm may place an advertisement. But I have yet to find a clear definition of what an advertisement is.

One definition I’ve seen is that advertising involves an active quest for clients. But is having a blog an active quest for clients?

Well, if after every post, I put “See how I can help you make more money with your law firm by calling me at 555-555-8785″, I’d see that as an active quest. But what about if I just have an email link somewhere hidden in the depths of my blog? I’d see that as more of a passive quest.

But now I’m getting into semantics. Back to the issue at hand.

One of the appeals of blogging is that (and this is a mantra repeated often) blogging is a conversation. People like blogs because they show a person’s perspective on a subject. While many marketers spend hours creating buzzword-heavy text that is meant to look like editorial content, people just don’t buy it. As the web matures, our BS meters are becoming increasingly well-tuned. And the emergence of splogs makes us even more aware when we’re being duped.

The truth is: if you’re an attorney who is just writing “give us your business” text and passing it off as a blog post, you’re not going to get very far.

So, with that all said, I don’t think legal blogs should be regulated as advertising. Are there some bad apples out there? Of course there are. Are some people going to take advantage of blogs to plug their businesses? Yep. But should we treat anyone who blogs as a potential scam artist? I don’t think that’s the best way to handle it.

Popularity: 9% [?]