Chamber of Commerce Group's Survey Finds Plaintiffs' Lawyers Using Deceptive Online Marketing

A new report by an advocacy group founded by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce shows that plaintiffs’ lawyers are increasingly using online marketing to connect with potential clients. The Feb. 29 report, sponsored by the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform, shows how attorneys use Google keyword advertising, Facebook, Twitter and, in some cases, marketing websites disguised as resource websites to attract clients.

But the report, called "The Plaintiffs' Bar Goes Digital, An Analysis of the Digital Marketing Efforts of Plaintiffs' Attorneys and Litigation Firms," found that many of the efforts by plaintiffs’ lawyers have become less transparent in an attempt to capture potential clients’ information. The study cites the use of search engine optimization to lead people to sites that portray themselves as support sites or forums, but actually have ties to firms.

“Trial attorney firms by far, I think are the most aggressive marketers digitally out there,” said Pete Snyder, founder of New Media Strategies, the agency hired by the Institute to conduct the study. “It all comes down to truth in advertising. I believe you need to be honest about what you’re representing.”

The report estimated that firms spent more than $50 million on advertising using Google ad words during 2011. Snyder said that firms have been engaging more in online advertising because it presents the best way to connect with an audience. He said that firms are “head and shoulders above in sophistication and in many terms, dollars spent,” when it comes to online advertising.

“They are not spending more than Proctor and Gamble or G.E.,” Snyder said of all forms of advertising. “For the size of their industry, they are spending an exorbitant amount.”

Snyder said that the study was not conducted with any preconceived ideas or conclusions.

In its efforts to promote tort reform, the Chamber has often found itself directly at odds with the country's trial lawyers, represented by the American Association for Justice.

“Attorneys’ online marketing expenses are surely trumped by the hoards of cash corporations funnel to the U.S. Chamber to help them get immunity for their defective products, junk mortgages, and insurance scams,” American Association for Justice spokesperson Michelle Widmann wrote in an emailed statement.

Comments

[LawyersandSettlements]

While the objectivity and methodology of the Chamber's report are surely to be questioned, we do need to set the record straight on at least one thing, given that our site, LawyersandSettlements.com, which provides legal news, was mentioned in the "study". We've somehow been lumped into a list of 'lead gen' sites--ones the study claims "often bear no visible branding by a law firm." True, LawyersandSettlements.com does not reveal any visible law firm branding simply because we are NOT owned by or affiliated with any law firm. Yes, there are lawyers who advertise on LawyersandSettlements.com, along with many other advertisers, and we're pretty transparent about that. So much so, that I'm surprised New Media Strategies missed the basic step of due diligence by not clicking on our About Us, FAQ, or Terms of Service pages to find out just who we are and what we do. For the record, LawyersandSettlements.com is a strong adherent of full transparency in online marketing and we welcome anyone to call us on any perceived lack of transparency or disclosure to our readership.

[John Smith]

Here is an example of the US Chamber of Commerce's lack of objectivity.

http://www.democracynow.org/2011/1/25/hot_coffee_documents_chamber_of_commerce

It's a business federation, not a governmental agency. It's a business lobby.

http://www.uschamber.com/about

[John Smith]

The documentary HOT COFFEE details how the US Chamber of Commerce is not much more than an organization to promote the interests of major corporations. The report is obviously skewed. Defense firms also market their firms' services but they use other media because they are soliciting the large corporations, which don't rely on social media. Of course, the large corporations would rather not have to pay EITHER their defense attorneys or the victims of their torts. That's where the US Chamber of Commerce comes in with these misleading reports. The only attorneys devoted to tort reform are corporate in-house counsel. They live with the corporation, so to speak. If large corporations did not commit torts, and white collar crime, the attorneys involved (both plaintiff and defense) would be out of business. Maybe the large corporations, if they want to put attorneys out of business, should stop committing torts and white collar crime; instead they try to engage in deceptive and misleading reports to further deceive the public. After all, what does one candidate's (Obama) online presidential advertising budget ($16 million) have to do with the combined online advertising budgets of millions of attorneys in the USA who solicit their services to the many more millions of injured victims of these large corporations?

[Robert Cameron]

we need legislation to mandate that all websites clearly state who they are, NOT just in a small disclaimer of "support" at the bottom or not at all like many (but not all!) legal websites

[Legal Advice]

The American Bar Association is in process to publish a White Paper on rules for advertising for legal professionals. There have been numerous comments from the legal community for many years now as regarding these recent developments. The ABA needs to codify the rules into law, sooner rather than later, so as to make these issues clear.

[Julianna of Roger Worthington, P.C.]

My company's name is on the list offered in the report and it blatantly misstates-overstates, what we spend on advertising, we do not spend even near the amount they have published, and I don't know where they got this information but it is a complete fabrication. We have submitted a request to The Institute for Legal Reform to cease and desist in their fraud of our company's name. We have yet to receive a response.

[Doug vanderHoof]

I help plaintiffs' attorneys market online, producing the specialty video that introduces the firm and gives general information about what to expect in various phases of law suits. It seems like straightforward free information that makes the firm look helpful. They don't do anything to capture PII as far as I can tell.
What are the offending firms doing? I definitely want to avoid that.
Any hard facts would be appreciated.
Cordially,
Doug vanderHoof
Chicago

Modern-media.com for litigation media and
DougvanderHoof.com for productions like web video.

[Publius 2.0]

The great Philadelphia lawyer, Andrew Hamilton, would have been hung by the Chamber of Commerce. Says a lot about its patriotism, respect for the rule of law, and regard for the Constitution. I feel sorry for all those foolish souls who work with, for or in affiliation with the Chamber.

[DarrenMcKinney]

Did you notice how the AAJ spokeswoman and at least two of the other comments here avoid the substance of the report and instead resort to well-worn ad hominem attacks against the Chamber?

If the personal injury bar isn't spending $50 million a year online to gin up more lawsuits (just what America's still-struggling economy needs, right?), and if much of that spending isn't dedicated to deliberately false and misleading advertising, then why wouldn't the AAJ simply correct the record?

It's time for state legislatures to subject parasitic tort lawyers and law firms to the same consumer protection laws against false advertising that said lawyers exploit and abuse routinely in coercing lucrative settlements from the truly productive elements of our economy and society. What's good for the goose should be good for the litigious gander.

Darren McKinney
American Tort Reform Association
Washington, D.C.

[SA Lawyer]

Yep. Wouldn't want anybody who tries to help claimants get their due from insurance companies to host a forum suggesting that the claimants might not actually be in the good hands of good neighbors.

[Justice Holmes]

Consider the source. The Chamber has been working hard for many years to make sure that workers and consumers are defenseless in the face of corporate greed and lawlessness. The Chamber has used millions to narrow the rights of individuals to have their grievances redressed in court and to enshrine corporate misbehavior as behavior that is immune from challenge. Not satisfied with their success in destroying the fairness of the civil justice system the Chamber has also focused their efforts on lawyers who dare to challenge them.

[Tom Berman]

Nothing like a truly objective report from a completely objective source.