Why law firms need a modern approach to modern media challenges
Clifford Chance's YouTube debacle highlights the need for firms to adopt comprehensive social media policies
February 19, 2015 at 07:00 PM
3 minute read
It would be impossible for a law firm -or indeed any organisation – to permanently avoid being dragged into the headlines as a result of the dubious actions of an employee. Whether it's down to the fraudulent or other criminal exploits of a member of staff, or more titillating but less grave cases involving morally questionable behaviour, most firms are likely to come to the attention of the general public at some point for something other than their legal work. As Clifford Chance (CC) knows full well, thanks to bitter recent experience, the huge increase in social media usage by employees significantly raises the stakes.
The good news for CC is that, while trainee Aysh Chaudhry's recent pro-Islamic YouTube rant in the wake of the Charlie Hebdo attacks in Paris attracted a tidal wave of adverse press comment across the UK and elsewhere in the world, in the longer term the damage is likely to be pretty minimal. As Legalweek.com's lead feature this week finds, while CC will have taken a short-term reputational hit from the affair, fallout from an economic crisis at a law firm is likely to be far more damaging in the long term.
True, the offending video arguably raises questions about the firm's graduate recruitment choices, but there is no suggestion that CC has actually done anything wrong. The fact it has so far stood by its trainee may have proved unpopular in some quarters, but it is no bad thing given that, as a law firm, CC needs to be seen to respect employment rights.
But that doesn't mean firms should ignore the threat posed by social media. Not only are employees more likely than ever to share aspects of internal corporate communication externally, the very fact that law firms deal in the law makes them ripe targets for headline writers.
This means tightening up – or in some cases putting in place – social media policies that strike a balance between encouraging employees to have a voice in social media and safeguarding the reputation of the firm. This could mean an increase in the disciplinary options available in the event of a breach of the guidelines. And, if they are not already doing it, firms should be systematically vetting candidates' social media activities at the recruitment stage.
It is a tightrope that firms must walk and the challenge will only increase as social media becomes more and more ingrained into the lives of successive generations of law graduates.
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 AllMcDermott Hits Paul Hastings In London Again As Macfarlanes Also Swoops For Talent
2 minute readRe-Examining Values: Greenberg Traurig's Executive Chairman on the Lessons of the Pandemic
4 minute readDiversity Commitments Feel Hollow When Firms Cosy Up to Oppressive Regimes
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Dechert partners Andrew J. Levander, Angela M. Liu and Neil A. Steiner have stepped in to defend Arbor Realty Trust and certain executives in a pending securities class action. The complaint, filed July 31 in New York Eastern District Court by Levi & Korsinsky, contends that the defendants concealed a 'toxic' mobile home portfolio, vastly overstated collateral in regards to the company's loans and failed to disclose an investigation of the company by the FBI. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Pamela K. Chen, is 1:24-cv-05347, Martin v. Arbor Realty Trust, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Arthur G. Jakoby, Ryan Feeney and Maxim M.L. Nowak from Herrick Feinstein have stepped in to defend Charles Dilluvio and Seacor Capital in a pending securities lawsuit. The complaint, filed Sept. 30 in New York Southern District Court by the Securities and Exchange Commission, accuses the defendants of using consulting agreements, attorney opinion letters and other mechanisms to skirt regulations limiting stock sales by affiliate companies and allowing the defendants to unlawfully profit from sales of Enzolytics stock. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Andrew L. Carter Jr., is 1:24-cv-07362, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Zhabilov et al.
Who Got The Work
Clark Hill members Vincent Roskovensky and Kevin B. Watson have entered appearances for Architectural Steel and Associated Products in a pending environmental lawsuit. The complaint, filed Aug. 27 in Pennsylvania Eastern District Court by Brodsky & Smith on behalf of Hung Trinh, accuses the defendant of discharging polluted stormwater from its steel facility without a permit in violation of the Clean Water Act. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Gerald J. Pappert, is 2:24-cv-04490, Trinh v. Architectural Steel And Associated Products, Inc.
Who Got The Work
Michael R. Yellin of Cole Schotz has entered an appearance for S2 d/b/a the Shoe Surgeon, Dominic Chambrone a/k/a Dominic Ciambrone and other defendants in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The case, filed July 15 in New York Southern District Court by DLA Piper on behalf of Nike, seeks to enjoin Ciambrone and the other defendants in their attempts to build an 'entire multifaceted' retail empire through their unauthorized use of Nike’s trademark rights. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Naomi Reice Buchwald, is 1:24-cv-05307, Nike Inc. v. S2, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Sullivan & Cromwell partner Adam S. Paris has entered an appearance for Orthofix Medical in a pending securities class action arising from a proposed acquisition of SeaSpine by Orthofix. The suit, filed Sept. 6 in California Southern District Court, by Girard Sharp and the Hall Firm, contends that the offering materials and related oral communications contained untrue statements of material fact. According to the complaint, the defendants made a series of misrepresentations about Orthofix’s disclosure controls and internal controls over financial reporting and ethical compliance. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Linda Lopez, is 3:24-cv-01593, O'Hara v. Orthofix Medical Inc. et al.
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