BigLaw Twitter Usage Compared


Free: 10 Things the Best Law-Firm Website Designs Have in Common

For seven years, Lawyerist has published an annual list of the best law firm websites. Now, you can find out what they have in common.

You guessed it, it’s Twitter for law firms time again. But this time we’re looking at BigLaw.

As you know, there’s a lot of talk about how law firms can use social media. Most of it involves trying to leverage these online communication tools for marketing, advertising, branding, etc. There is some discussion about using it for what it’s actually good for, having conversations with people to which you might not otherwise have access. But are any big law firms actually doing this? Let’s have a look.

Jones Day looks relatively active on Twitter (about 50 tweets in May). But what are they actually tweeting? Here’s a recent example:

Which is basically a broadcast of an article on their website. Is this wrong or bad? Not necessarily. They have notified their 800+ followers or their article. But if you dig a little deeper into their twitter feed, you’ll see that virtually all of their tweets follow this pattern. No @replies, no engagement, no discussion. They did have a re-tweet in May:

Which is basically more of the same.

A Twitter search for @jonesday reveals that some Twitter users are trying to communicate with them:

But these requests go largely unanswered (at least on their public feed). This is not following Twitter’s business best practice advice.

How about Kirkland & Ellis LLP? Not as active as Jones Day (only 9 tweets in May), but definitely some more engagement, at least attempted engagement. They use @replies in almost all of their tweets:

But again, the tweets tend to be more updates than discussions.

How about Nixon Peabody LLP (92 tweets in May)? That’s pretty active. Let’s see what they’re up to.

Live tweeting of a webinar:

Albeit brief, some actual conversations:

Video sharing:

As you can see, somewhat better engagement. Some actual internetworking.

I don’t know what sort of value these firms place on social media. I would guess that they believe that they are “expected” to exist there. Some of them probably entered the fray on the advice of a consultant. Others likely wrongly view social media and networking tools as inexpensive marketing/advertising platforms.

I would suggest that in order for these tools to serve their maximum capacity, firms need to think more like Nixon Peabody. Focus on engagement over broadcast. Participate in more actual conversations. Respond to @replies. Share photos and videos of real firm attorneys, news and events.

Sure, include updates from the firm’s websites and blogs. But share them in a conversational manner. Avoid shouting into the echo chamber.

If you’re going to measure anything, focus on motivating quality:

  • Twitter: Retweets and Mentions
  • Facebook: Comments, Wall-Posts, Likes
  • LinkedIn: Comments, Likes
  • Google+: Comments, Reshares, +1

These are about as good as it gets when it comes to feedback and social web performance indicators (of course you might get actual compliments and criticisms too).

Don’t obsess over follower numbers, what time of day you’re publishing tweets and how many auto-tweets you should be loading into HootSuite per day.

And keep perspective. Heed Sam’s advice:

even if you focus on social media, you will need to do good work, share your knowledge, and be superficially social. If you can do it offline, you will have a better chance of doing it online.

And don’t allow it to become, as Bruce Godfrey puts it:

a total trainwreck of a time suck.


Get Lawyerist in Your Inbox, Daily

Current Articles
Current Lab Discussions
  • Good analysis, don’t disagree with anything written in the article. Jones Day et. al are not social media superstars. But why would they be? How does Jones Day drive Antitrust or Private Equity business via Twitter? Don’t see it. The blog context, which allows for deeper analysis is a different story, but Twitter and Facebook to access institutional clients? Any potential client of Jones Day that is on Twitter, isn’t really on Twitter. They’re social media consultant is on Twitter, because as you correctly point out, they “have to be.”

  • I was hired back in April as Nixon Peabody’s first Social Media Manager (thank you, Gyi, for the nice mention of our firm). My personal philosophy when it comes to using Twitter for the firm is that by engaging with other users, we can actually support overall marketing efforts. For example, I live tweeted that #RecruitingTMI webinar, which was a marketing-driven event, with two goals in mind: to get a sense of who (besides those who registered for the webinar) might be interested in the subject and to take the first steps toward moving the firm’s Twitter account from a broadcast channel to an engagement channel. As you point out, the conversations were brief, but I think we did succeed in establishing ourselves as an account that is interested in providing value on relevant topics, and not just as a platform for pushing out our news. We’re always going to use Twitter as a place to disseminate firm news, but I think if that’s all it is then it’s a waste of our time. I look at Twitter as a tool for raising overall brand awareness. Simply accumulating followers is not a measure of success. If we can get those followers (and those who don’t follow us) to talk to us, then we’re moving in the right direction.

  • Leo

    I prefer chatting with folks like @Popehat, @Btannebaum & @ScottGreenfield. You know, real people whose twitter feeds aren’t sanitized and vetted to the point that anything remotely interesting is zapped.