Some law firms are making the move to social networking sites like Avvo, Martindale Hubbel Connected, Linkedin, Facebook, and Twitter. As Christine E. Mayle indicates, there are some ethical pitfalls involved in social networking. Even blogs (or "blawgs" as industry wags like to call them) can cause problems. More detail and though on these ethical issues can be found after the jump.
Ms. Mayle points out five major ethical issues that come from an increased web presence.
- 1. Is your website an advertisement? Some states consider websites advertisements, which means that lawyers must label their sites as such. Since social networking profile pages are also websites, it is highly possible that some attorneys may run afoul of rules that regulate advertisements based upon the content of their social networking presence. South Carolina has indicated that even Avvo.com endorsements and testimonials may fall under this designation.
- 2. Does your state allow written testimonials? As noted above, some states consider these testimonials improper. Since many social networking sites allow people to recommend attorneys or provide testimonials, it is important to know how your state feels about testimonials and delete them accordingly.
- 3. Does your profile or other "about me" information include claims that you are an expert? Since most states prohibit attorneys calling themselves experts or specialists without being certified by an organization that is accredited by a state bar or the ABA, doing so online would run afoul of the rule. If attorneys are also responsible for the statements of others (e.g. testimonials), it is important to police those comments for such claims as well.
- 4. Are you soliciting? The Model Rules prohibit in-person solicitation. This also applies to real time electronic communications. Email is governed by the rules for paper mailings, but can also be problematic unless the email is clearly marked as an advertisement. It would seem that including "ADVERTISING MATERIAL" in the subject line would be sufficient. However, what about Facebook and Twitter status updates? Since they are persistent until changed are they real time communications or similar to emails? The safest bet is to just not say anything that may seem like a solicitation. Even, "Username is now taking clients in the following practice areas," may be enough to trigger an ethics violation.
- 5. Are you violating client confidentiality? Even posting an update that says what you are doing could accidentally divulge case strategy. Quite simply, since anyone can see what you post, it is best to just not post anything that remotely relates to your day-to-day office activities. Use common sense. "Username is eating a doughnut," is probably fine. "Username is about to serve someone with a five-count complaint predicated upon violations of ICFA," could become problematic.
As a final thought, using common sense is your best defense in the online world. Keeping abreast of changes to your state's ethics rules is always smart, but as states begin to address these issues, expect the rules to change. Exercise some diligence and remove any content from your online presence that you feel may expose you to ethics liability. And, above all else, please don't post photos from your weekend -- we don't need to see your lampshade hat.
