Except He Wasn't A Lawyer, And You Said Nothing

There will be no links to him here, the moronic, career-suicidal law student that in 2012 called himself a "lawyer" on his twitter bio. It's over, he's deleted his account. He's gone. He's let me know privately he now understands what he was doing, what he was possibly doing, and in a moment of maturity - he said "thank you."

Yes, I was the twitter police, again.

Yeah, you remember, the lawyer-turned convicted felon who was still soliciting business on twitter, pretending to still be practicing?

And so last night someone tells me about a young law student who claims to be a "lawyer" on twitter. The typical "happysphere" lawyers, who see confrontation as a "friend" and "follower" killer, a dead end to social media rock stardom, sat back and enjoyed the show - apparently for days, weeks.

But as one happysphere lawyer told a "rookie lawyer" that inquired about me: I'm mean.

After asking the law student whether he considered who may see his twitter-feed (his law school Dean, the Bar), he claimed it to be entertainment. After I asked who may be entertained, he contiued to explain. I explained that explaining this was only creating a "paper" trail, and suggested he get the hell off twitter.

So he did.

Yes, I "bullied" him off twitter.

Except he didn't see it that way.

It was just some of the lawyers on twitter that did.

You said nothing. You thought it was funny.

I, Mr. Mean, decided to help a brother out.

Because I'm mean.

Anonymous comments are welcome as long as they say something relevant and half-way intelligent and arent a vehicle for a coward to attack someone. I trust you understand. Located in Miami, Florida, Brian Tannebaum practices Bar Admission and Discipline and Criminal Defense. He is the author of I Got A Bar Complaint.

The Short But Interesting Life Of The Article III Clerk

A couple days ago I stumbled upon a twitter account "Article III Clerk." It purported to be a young federal judicial clerk to an older judge (Bio: "Current law clerk for a Senior U.S. District Judge on the East Coast. He’s really fucking old, so I roll the dice of justice on my own"}, and he tweeted with the arrogance of, well, some young federal judicial law clerks.

I had a suspicion it was a joke. It was over the top.

"The opposition you filed was goddamn unreadable. You think I want 10 more typo-ridden pages about what light I should view evidence in?"

It was actually funny. He thought out loud about the stupidity of pleadings he received, claimed his judge was never around (and senile) so he was running the place, and he had 127 followers.

But it was also, well, strong:

"Judge called from home today to “check in.” I got it under control you senile fuck. Go back to napping underneath 20 blankets."

"I really, really hope the Judge doesn’t die while I’m clerking."

I, being the all powerful with about 3,700 followers on twitter (some who actually aren't spam bots or porn peddlers) asked why he only had 127 followers.

With an hour he had 40 more.

Then he got the attention of Eric Turkewitz, who also wondered if it was a joke:

If truthful, he’s revealed that he works for a senior federal judge on the east coast who may not be well, that he is 27, and the court clerk is female. That’s a lot of biographical data to narrow down the possibilities. Also, that he’s incredibly arrogant for a young pup that may never have stood in the well himself.

And now he's gone. Poof. Deleted his account.

It could only be because it was true.

And for anyone practicing in his judge's court, that's pretty scary.

Of course there will be those who will say he was "bullied" off twitter. You know, the other liars and frauds that want to peddle their thoughts and consulting services to desperate lawyers? They'll whine and cry and say Turk was mean and that poor young kid got scared.

I say he got smart, and ended it before it was too late.

Maybe.

It's never too late to make a U-turn, unless you've already gone off the cliff.

Anonymous comments are welcome as long as they say something relevant and half-way intelligent and arent a vehicle for a coward to attack someone. I trust you understand. Located in Miami, Florida, Brian Tannebaum practices Bar Admission and Discipline and Criminal Defense. He is the author of I Got A Bar Complaint.

A Comprehensive Analysis Of The Kenneth Cole Twitter Disaster

Yesterday, Kenneth Cole, a company that makes clothes for cool people, and suits and shoes for those millenials that want to present the "fine, I'll wear a suit" attitude," tweeted this:



For those not familiar with twitter, it is a social media site where people can type 140 character messages.

In the rare occasion where people on twitter believe something important outside of twitter is going on, they create a hashtag. A hashtag allows someone to search all the tweets about the topic. This is done by using the # sign and adding a word.

For example:

#Starbucks

Or:

#JustinBieber

With the recent events in #Egypt (by the way, that hashtag doesn't do anything, I just wanted to add another example), there are a couple hashtags that people use, including #Cairo.

Kenneth Cole "tweeted" this I believe because they thought it was funny.

Some people thought it wasn't funny, and rather insensitive.

So the people who were offended, began typing, and typing, and typing.

Like this:



And Kenneth Cole took it down and apologized.

The lesson here is that if you say something that you think is funny, and a bunch of people think it's not funny, they will type about it. Then, others will join in and say things like "yeah, that wasn't funny."

Because of the internet, the people who think something is not funny, will get a bigger voice than...let's say they would in 1982.

And everyone will know that a bunch of people think you weren't funny.

So the marketing lesson here is that if you say something that people don't think is funny, or they think it is insensitive, they will write about it on the internet, and you will be able to read about it. The result is that some people may not buy your product anymore, and others will forget about it in 3 days.

So from a marketing perspective, if you think something is funny, remember, people on twitter may not think it's funny, and when they don't think it's funny, then people like me get to write about the important meaning of saying something that others don't find funny.

If you think something is funny, remember, it may not be viewed that way on twitter.

Ok?

Located in Miami, Florida, Brian Tannebaum practices Bar Admission and Discipline and Criminal Defense. He is the author of I Got A Bar Complaint.

Twitter: Still The Worst Place To Find A (Real) Lawyer

My friend and fellow blogger Scott Greenfield revealed the conspiracy - that a few of us lawyers decided to take a break from the silliness of twitter.

Twitter, at its core, is a means of communication. To some, it is their career. To some, it is their life. Those obsessed with the fallacy that twitter is the key to building a successful career in any field are angered anytime anyone (like me) states anything to the contrary. It's not that they disagree, it's that the mere voicing of any disagreement with the notion that twitter or social media is the end-all-be-all, may actually cause people to agree. Those that have failed at substantive careers and opened up offices in Starbucks or their kitchen tables don't want word to spread that it's all a cruel, meaningless, irrelevant, joke.

When I first starting using twitter, I soon stopped. I didn't understand it. I was urged to try again, and given, for free, the best social media advice around - "just get on there and start talking to people."

So I did.

Then I got it. Twitter is a conversation, nothing more.

Twitter is also a great medium for former and failed and disbarred, and convicted lawyers to parade themselves as relevant to those desperate lawyers looking for the silver bullet of success. There are as many "Top 10" lists as there are hours in a day. There as those who had their fill of law, whether it was 10 years or 10 minutes, that are there to tell you how to do everything. There are plenty of desperate, broke, Starbucks dwelling lawyers, who are all too ready to believe that a lawyer who practiced "associate" law for 6 months has all the secrets to building business.

Few ask questions, many kiss the ass of those that have no specialized knowledge of the medium other than that they are "passionate" about it. The circle of those that think each other "awesome," or "change agents" or "gurus," or "rock stars," is a circle of the most irrelevant humans on the planet.

Then there is the notion that the use of social media must, must, have goals. Bullshit. Those that preach this are doing so because they can sell you those goals. Those who preach secrets of social media are shameless losers merely looking for that desperate consumer who will maybe write a check for some "guru" advice.

No lawyer will ever build a practice on twitter. Have I received referrals and cases "from" twitter? Sure. But it's not because I dimed out the latest fake lawyer claiming to be the Wizard of Oz, or because I mentioned the word "law" or "lawyer" or whatever. I received and receive referrals and cases from twitter because people take a closer look, because I actually have an office, and a practice, and clients, and cases.

The cart never comes before the horse - except on twitter. My rule is that anyone on twitter trying to get you to pay them for social media advice, is someone from whom to stay far away. There is a collection of these scam artists, these tweeters of everything shiny and techno and social media like, who claim to know something. They know nothing. They like social media, that's all.

Sure I'll be back on twitter. I enjoy the conversation. I've met some great people. I have developed relationships with lawyers and other people not because they are on twitter, but because who they really are.

My time off from twitter has given me a new perspective on the conversation going on there with those former(and even current)-lawyers-turned-social-media-idiots. Some of the conversation is nothing more than re-tweeting articles about social media, and re-tweeting articles about new shiny things and their sure domination over the world. Twitter still, is the worst place to find real lawyers, because the real lawyers are not interested in conversations about cell phones and their apps. Technology is a tool for lawyers, not the core of their existence.

The further I am from these shallow "lawyers," the more I am embarrassed by their existence in my profession. The more I wonder why anyone listens to them, except for the fact that they believe snake oil is the solution to their woes. Meaningless conversation is always important to get through a day. To some of these folks, it's the entirety of their conversation. To some, their day is based on meaningless conversation, attempts to get hired by lawyers, and making sure everyone knows that people love them. These "lawyers" will never accomplish anything important, except to have someone else tell them how awesome they are.

The lying continues, the demeaning of our profession continues, and the hope of desperate lawyers looking to retire off of twitter, continues. It's all very sad.

I look forward to jumping back in to the mix, and continuing to point out all the garbage that calls themselves "lawyers." To me, it's fun. To others, it's sadly, all they have.

Please RT.

Located in Miami, Florida, Brian Tannebaum practices Bar Admission and Discipline and Criminal Defense. He is the author of I Got A Bar Complaint.

The Florida Bar: We'll Tell You Who You Can Be Friends With

With a straight face, The Florida Bar determined at it's December 11th meeting of the Board of Governors, the following in regard to lawyer websites: (AVVO's General Counsel Josh King has his thoughts here).

[1] Lawyers’ use of online social networking sites is subject to the same rules as lawyer Web sites.

[2] Web site visitors (meaning "stupid potential clients that we need to protect from big bad lawyers) must view a disclaimer page that clearly indicates what information will be viewed, including: That page could include whether all results or client testimonials are provided, that the results or testimonials are not necessarily representative of results obtained by the lawyer or all clients’ experience with the lawyer, and that a prospective client’s individual facts and circumstances may differ from the matter(s) in which the results or testimonial are provided.

The disclaimer also has to say that, (this is great) the information behind the disclaimer is not regulated by Bar advertising rules. (As Elmer Fudd would say: be berwey berwey careful).

[3] On the disclaimer page, the viewer has to accept or acknowledge receipt of the information before being given access to pages that follow. (Merry Christmas to web-site designers).

Oh, and lookie here, according to the Florida Bar News Article: The committee acted at the request of Ft. Lauderdale lawyer Peter T. Boyd, who owns PaperStreet Web Design, a company that designs Web sites for other lawyers.

And here's more protection for those idiot potential clients who the Bar wants to protect: The information would be considered “upon request” only if the lawyer sets the Web site up to block (BLOCK!) the area containing past results and testimonials from viewers who have not submitted acknowledgement of viewing the disclaimer page, and the testimonials and/or past results would only be shown upon submission of the agreement after viewing the disclaimer page.

Seriously folks, when will we realize that Bar advertising rules are nothing more than calling potential clients "stupid?"

Now that we're done making sure potential clients are protected from themselves when viewing lawyer websites, lets move to social networking.

Facebook, LinkedIn, YouTube, Twitter, and all other social networking sites are now subject to Rule 4-7.2, but are not required to be filed for review.

No statements that characterize the quality of legal services being offered; provide information regarding past results; or include testimonials. No, no, no.

Lawyers are not responsible for other party’s postings,(yet), unless the lawyer prompts the posting or uses the other party to circumvent the lawyer advertising rules.

And this is the absolute best:

Invitations to a third party to view or link to the lawyer’s social networking page on an unsolicited basis are considered in-person solicitation and violate Rule 4-7.4(a), unless the third party is the lawyer’s current client, former client, relative, or another lawyer.

Oh, and YouTube postings must comply with Rule 4-7.2, except the requirement they be submitted to the Bar for review.

The Bar did note in asking for a six-month moratorium on enforcement, that "the practical effect is most lawyer Web sites are out of compliance with the new rules.

All of this is utterly ridiculous, and displays a complete lack of understanding of social media. I have no problem with keeping lawyers honest - whether it's in person, or on-line, but the Bar has rules to cover this already:

RULE 4-8.4 MISCONDUCT

A lawyer shall not:

(c) engage in conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation....

That's pretty clear to me.

Located in Miami, Florida, Brian Tannebaum practices Bar Admission and Discipline and Criminal Defense. Read his free ebook The Truth About Hiring A Criminal Defense Lawyer. Please visit www.tannebaumweiss.com

Do Lawyers Need Protection From Themselves On Twitter?

There's been a bit of a sweeping cleanup of the cess pool that is twitter these days. Those parading as lawyers or "former lawyers" have been called out on their qualifications, and lack thereof. They have quietly removed the lies about their background, while taking advice from "internet defamation lawyers" to "not engage." That's good advice to those who have nothing of any relevance to say.

And yesterday an interesting question was asked from an anonymous commenter on Brian Cuban's Blog: Do lawyers really need that much protection?

Great question.

Do lawyers not do their own research to see the background of the person who wants them to "blog for profit" or if the latest "twitter for lawyers" book was written by a lawyer who is suspended, or if the real estate "lawyer" who wants lawyers to network with her firm was recently convicted and is currently delinquent with the Bar?

No.

These are desperate times.

And desperate lawyers would rather follow people lying about their qualifications as social media experts than real lawyers who may have a tip or two about becoming not a better tweeter, but a better lawyer.

Here's the proof:

Listed below are some of the people who are perceived to be "social media" and "tech" types on twitter that are or were lawyers, or market to lawyers, and their followers:

Grant Griffiths (Disbarred) 6,302 Followers

Adrian Dayton 41,812 Followers.

Sheryl Sisk Schelin (Suspended) 772 Followers.

Stephen Fairley 10,256 Followers.

Now here's a sampling of a few lawyers who actually have clients, may go to court, generally spend their days "practicing law," and their followers on twitter: (This is not an "all-inclusive list of all the great "real" lawyers on twitter, so please stop emailing me).

Eric Turkewitz - Personal Injury Lawyer 291 Followers

Mark Bennett - Criminal Defense Lawyer - 536 Followers

Scott Phillips - General Practice Lawyer - 240 Followers

Ben Kearney - Business Law - 214 Followers

Ken Lammers - Prosecutor - 139 Followers

Gideon - a public defender - 593 Followers

Donzell - another public defender - 223 Followers

Cynthia Henley 277 Followers, and Jackie Carpenter 68 Followers - female criminal defense lawyers (not many of those unfortunately).

And the incomparable Scott Greenfield - criminal defense lawyer - 812 Followers.

And yes, there are the exceptions - some "real" lawyers have thousands of followers. But the difference in general between those who market to lawyers, and those who are lawyers is remarkable.

So this begs the question to the lawyers on twitter - don't any of you aspire to be like any of these lawyers? Practice in areas in which these lawyers practice? Learn something that may make you a better lawyer?

Or are you just looking for the latest IPhone app?

Located in Miami, Florida, Brian Tannebaum practices Bar Admission and Discipline and Criminal Defense. Read his free ebook The Truth About Hiring A Criminal Defense Lawyer. Please visit www.tannebaumweiss.com