The Florida Bar Is Taking a Hard Look at Lawyers' Social Media Content
Now, social media is all the rage with law firms jockeying for position on Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn and Twitter. Some practitioners get straight to the point with direct advertising while others try the more subtle approach of a blog post or other informational release such as a scholarly article or legal update.
May 12, 2020 at 09:06 AM
4 minute read
There is obviously great competition for clients in the legal marketplace. What started as advertising on matchbook covers slowly evolved into bus stop advertisements, billboards, radio advertisements, and, eventually, television. Now, social media is all the rage with law firms jockeying for position on Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn and Twitter. Some practitioners get straight to the point with direct advertising while others try the more subtle approach of a blog post or other informational release such as a scholarly article or legal update.
Florida lawyers know that there is sometimes a fine line between information releases and an advertisement. When it comes to advertising, Florida lawyers must satisfy the dictates of the Florida Bar that scrutinizes lawyer advertising. There are all sorts of things the Florida Bar has determined to be forbidden, such as holding yourself out as an "expert" without the ability for the claim of expertise to be objectively verified or promising a client a result in a particular case. Nonetheless, the advent of social media has placed lawyer communications with prospective clients in the cross hairs of the Florida Bar's increasing scrutiny of the social posts of Florida lawyers.
This appears to be particularly true when lawyers target clients to become representatives in class actions. The latest regulation change for social media was announced recently, as a result of the Board of Governors' January meeting in which the board overturned an 8-3 decision by the Standing Committee on Advertising regarding a lawyer who wanted to use information directed to prospective class action members on social media platforms in order to target specific ads to their social media feeds.
The Florida Bar determined that direct solicitation rules (and not the general advertising rules) apply to targeted social media ads. Lawyers who want to use targeted social media advertisements have to comply with Bar Rule 4-7.18(b). That rule prohibits lawyers from sending written or electronic communications, "directly or indirectly" to potential clients unless it involves a personal injury, wrongful death, or other accident or disaster-related matter that occurred at least 30 days before the communication. In other words, Florida lawyers are not permitted to communicate, directly or indirectly, with accident victims less than thirty days after the event in question takes place.
Those lawyers who seek to communicate with prospective class action members would be well advised to follow the Florida Bar's general advertising rules that can be found at Rule 4-7.13 (regulating deceptive and inherently misleading advertisements), Rule 4-7.14 (defining potentially misleading advertisements), Rule 4-7.15 (discussing unduly manipulative or intrusive advertisements) and Rule 4-7.16 (defining presumptively valid content). While the Florida Bar did not provide its specific rationale for the newly defined approach to regulating social media directed to potential members of a class action, at least some of the rationale may be intuitively obvious. A flood of media that has occurred over the last several years has publicized record attorneys' fee awards for class action lawyers. Members of the general public may be misled into believing that acting as a representative in a class action is a way to make easy money. In reality, however, in most class actions, the lawyers typically earn more than the class action representatives.The scrutiny of social media advertising to potential class action members increases the likelihood that they will begin any foray into class action litigation fully informed.
To ensure your social media advertising plans are in line with the latest regulations, contact the Florida Bar Ethics and Attorney Advertising department at 850-561-5780.
Patricia Beitler is president at Velocitas Interactive Marketing + Public Relations in Miami. She advises clients on communications strategies, digital marketing, social media and public relations. Contact her at [email protected].
Roger Slade is a shareholder at Haber Law in Miami. He concentrates his practice in commercial and business litigation, international business law and litigation, shareholder and partnership litigation, and family law litigation. Contact him at [email protected].
|This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllNavigating Claims Under the Florida Telephone Solicitation Act and Florida Telemarketing Act
4 minute readSecond Circuit Ruling Expands VPPA Scope: What Organizations Need to Know
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Virginia Griffith, Director of Business Development at OutsideGC
- 2Legal Speak at General Counsel Conference East 2024: Bill Tanenbaum, Partner & Chair, AI & Data Law Practice Group at Moses Singer
- 3Morgan & Morgan Looks to Grow Into Complex Litigation While Still Keeping its Billboards Up
- 4Thursday Newspaper
- 5Public Notices/Calendars
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250