The post Meta Will Block All News Stories On Facebook And Instagram In Canada After New Law Demands Payment To Publishers appeared first on Social Media Explorer.

Andrew Napolitano is a highly successful attorney, judge, and educator. Mr. Napolitano attended Princeton University and Notre Dame Law school. Mr. Napolitano did all of his undergraduate studies at Princeton University and then he went on to receive his J.D. from Notre Dame Law school. Mr. Napolitano is a Newark, New Jersey native. After graduating from law school and passing the bar in New Jersey back in 1975, he started a private practice as a litigator. One of his first teaching jobs was for one year at the Delaware School of Law; this was back in 1980 and ended in 1981. Mr. Napolitano has published and authored nine books on the topics of politics and legalities. He was a New Jersey Supreme Court judge for over eight years, from the late 1980s until the mid-1990s. He taught as a visiting professor at Brooklyn Law School. He was also a trial and legal news analyst for Fox News. So his experience spans many different areas of law & politics.

Napolitano has a few law schools that he considers to stand out in the New York state area. He believes the law schools to be the best in this area are Columbia University School of Law, New York University School of Law, and St. John’s University School of Law.

St. John’s University School of Law: New York City

St. John’s University School of Law is on the list of America’s top 100 law schools. This is a Catholic University and it is a private school. An advantage to attending Saint John’s University School of Law is that the LSAT score required for entrance to the school is lower than most institutions. There are not a lot of students competing to attend the University, so the applications are minimal. This institution only has about 250 law students yearly. The school is expensive to attend and is located in Queens, New York.

New York University School of Law

The New York University School of Law is one of the more prominent law schools in New York and America. The school has a student body of over 1600 students. The school is home-based in Greenwich Village, Manhattan. This is one of the more challenging schools to get into because of its popularity. The school is known to produce the best attorneys because of its extensive and challenging curriculum NYU is a historic school and has been in existence since 1831. If an individual is accepted into NYU, they will be in an elite class of attorneys. The graduates of this school usually always pass the bar and receive some of the highest salaries for new graduate attorneys.

Columbia University School of Law
Columbia University School of Law is possibly the best law school in America. When an individual graduates from this program as an attorney, they get some of the most prestigious job offers that pay incredibly high. Getting accepted into this law school is very competitive. The university is small and private and the average student body is just under three hundred and fifty students. The school is very picky about the students they accept into their program—the reason is that every law student who takes the bar exam passes. Columbia University School of Law has a passing rate above 97%.  This is why Andrew Napolitano thinks it is one of the best universities to study law.

The post Top Law Schools in New York appeared first on Social Media Explorer.

Duran has his own law firm, Bufete Ruiz Duran S.C. Abogados. After founding the firm nine years ago, he has established himself as one of Mexico’s most respected and successful criminal defense attorneys, especially in high profile cases. He earned several degrees during his college years. He obtained a Masters of Science, Criminology degree from the University of Oxford, as well as a Law degree from the University of Cambridge. In addition, he has a degree in Negotiation and Leadership from Harvard University. With years of education and experience under his belt, Duran strives to continuously improve the success of his law firm and he understands that doing so will require several business techniques. 

Like other businesses, Diego Ruiz Duran realizes that in order to drive in more clients, he has to invest in marketing and advertisements. However, this can be tricky in the sense that instead of providing a physical product, he is providing an invisible service, something that cannot be shown on a billboard or Facebook ad. Because of this, he has to invest in television advertising to give consumers a chance to experience his personality and what he has to offer. The commercial must be welcoming, relatable, and trustworthy. Duran has to sell to his potential clients that he is a comforting figure who will provide the best care as well as strong results for the people he works with. 

In addition to promoting the law firm, Duran must also acquire tremendous people skills. When consumers are spending large amounts of money and putting trust into a lawyer in hopes that they will come out of a case victorious, the lawyer must maintain a strong relationship with them. Clients want to feel comfortable around their attorneys and gradually develop trust that will help both parties gain the confidence they need before a trial begins. Lawyers like Duran must have likeable personalities and maintain the balance of being a serious professional at law as well as a friend and confidant to their clients. I will benefit the firm in the long run by forming a reputation of being a service that consumers can rely on and feel welcome as soon as they walk in the door.

When law students finally earn their degree, most are not aware of the business skills that will become necessary for them to become as successful as Diego Ruiz Duran. He believes that law schools should better incorporate business courses so students can become fully prepared and well rounded when entering the workforce. Basic financial, people, and marketing skills are key to a renowned attorney at a thriving law firm. Duran hopes that this article will help young law professionals realize just how important it is to keep up with business knowledge surrounding the world of law. There is a lot more to being a lawyer than just studying up on law itself, it takes years of understanding the complete aspect of the career path and the intricate details that go along with it.

The post Diego Ruiz Duran Discusses the Business Side of Law appeared first on Social Media Explorer.

Royalty-free image

To get started, take a look at these three essential tools and techniques that every law firm should be using in 2021:

1. Video Marketing

The popularity of video content has grown significantly in recent years and users across all demographics regularly view videos online. For lawyers, the opportunity to build rapport with a potential client makes video marketing a powerful tool. 

When you’re producing legal marketing videos, you can increase your ROI by focusing on evergreen topics and maximizing your reach. When you incorporate a video in a landing page, for example, it can increase conversions by a staggering 80%.

Despite this, a recent survey conducted by the American Bar Association showed that only 24% of firms are using video marketing. If you want to outperform your competitors, incorporating video content into your marketing strategy can certainly be an effective way to achieve your goals.

2. Local SEO

As laws vary between states and countries, law firms typically operate as local businesses. Due to this, it’s essential to incorporate a local SEO strategy into your digital marketing. Although 97% of people learn more about local companies online than anywhere else, 40% of small law firms don’t even have a functional website. 

As well as having an engaging site to promote your brand, using local SEO enables you to execute highly targeted marketing campaigns. By targeting a specific geographical area, for example, you can reach users who are actively looking for legal services in a particular town, city, or region. This gives you the opportunity to engage prospective leads who are further down the sales funnel and optimize your conversion rate. 

3.  PPC Ads

Pay-per-click advertising is another way that law firms can implement targeted campaigns, which enables them to engage users from particular locations or from within certain demographics. Not only is PPC advertising highly effective, but it can also be adapted to suit any budget. 

This means that law firms of all sizes can utilize PPC advertising to increase brand awareness and increase client acquisition. For smaller firms that typically invest less time and resources into digital marketing, this makes PPC advertising a valuable tool to enhance a firm’s online presence. 

Integrating Your Legal Digital Marketing

Although there are many tools and techniques that can be used to promote a brand online, some are more suited to the legal industry than others. By using these tools cohesively, law firms and attorneys can create integrated digital marketing campaigns that deliver enhanced results. 

As we move towards an increasingly mobile and digital landscape, it’s vital that law firms embrace online marketing and use it to their advantage. With specialist legal digital marketing, for example, law firms can increase brand awareness, boost their professional reputation and, crucially, increase conversion and acquisition rates. 

The post Law Firm Marketing: 3 Essential Tools and Techniques appeared first on Social Media Explorer.

There is so much more to the work lawyers do than most cannot even imagine. One must realize that lawyers have to consider every aspect of the case, even if one is guilty. Defense law explains that every person has the right to a legal defense no matter who is at fault. One must assess every angle to arrive at the right outcome and solution. This takes a lot of time and works on the part of a criminal defense lawyer. Lawyers have the role of collecting every piece of evidence. Then, one’s lawyer determines whether the information is relevant or not. It is up to one’s lawyer to conclude a suitable timeline. Some cases take longer than others to prove, which can include gathering extra evidence and information. One’s lawyer must possess a lot of skill to do this. One’s lawyer must be able to know the difference between relevant data and noise. Evidence has to be collected from both sides. Make no mistake, there will be noise(irrelevant data) coming from both sides. It is the job of one’s criminal lawyer to know the difference.

 A defense lawyer might have to show up in court more than once or twice a week. This is evident when one is presented with a difficult criminal case. Some cases are not simply open and shut because someone assumes it should be. The law is not necessarily black and white. There are many shades of grey when it comes to criminal law practices, and rules. There could be different elements of the case, according to defense law statute. This is where collecting evidence and showing up in court (sometimes several times a week) is deemed necessary. It is also important that one’s lawyer keeps one updated on what is happening. One’s lawyer should keep one updated in all matters, including when one’s case has hit a snag or two. One has to know how to work through the challenges. That is why one’s lawyer has to keep one updated on all aspects. One’s lawyer has to be able to handle extreme and tough situations. Problems are going to arise. One’s lawyer has to navigate through the emotions. One’s lawyer is going to be required to work late, even on weekends. A criminal defense lawyer is not a 9-5 job. One has to expect that things will come up with one’s lawyer at the last minute. A good lawyer is required to work even when one has had very little sleep. It takes more than wearing a nice suit and having good communication to be a lawyer. One must be aware of all these things before one hires someone to represent. Diego Ruiz Durán studied law to be one of the best lawyers in the world.

The post Some Of The More Common Roles One Can See A Defense Lawyer Performing Regularly appeared first on Social Media Explorer.

“You don’t ‘own’ any audience,” as Jeffrey K. Rohrs, author of the recent book Audience, observed in a recent interview for the MarketingProfs podcast. “In this era of permission marketing, no audience is owned.”

True, and yet even short-lived access to a valuable constituency does have monetary value. (In fact, there’s a formula that purports to calculate how much money Twitter “owes you” based on your following.)

As is often true, the law is scrambling to catch up with technology. Stacey Mattocks, a fan who created a popular Facebook page for the show “The Game,” back when it was on the CW network, has sued BET for having Facebook delete her page and transfer the 6.2 million “Likes” to BET’s new official Facebook page for the show.

Mattocks alleges that the network’s actions constituted conversion (stealing), breach of contract, and tortious interference, among other claims.

She also alleges “copyright infringement” on the basis that BET took parts of the Facebook page she created and used them on its new “official” page. I find it difficult to imagine how that will fly, when the original images are most likely owned by the network, but that issue is much less interesting than the question of who owns Facebook Likes.

The specific facts and the intent of the parties is in dispute, but it’s clear that, at least initially, the relationship between Mattocks and BET was positive, and they supported her as a brand advocate and as a fan of the show. The relationship soured when BET wanted to purchase the page (as well as a related Twitter account) from Mattocks for $15,000, and she countered asking for $1.2 million.

When the parties failed to agree upon a purchase price, Mattocks changed BET’s access to administer the page in Facebook, demoting them to “moderator.” This in turn prompted the network to request that Facebook shut Mattocks’s page down and transfer the Likes to its newly created page, ultimately escalating the dispute until Mattocks filed suit.

BET maintains that any claim for “conversion,” which is the wrongful use of someone else’s property, cannot succeed, because Facebook “Likes” are not “property” in the legal sense of the word.

The reality is, however, that the law does recognize certain temporary interests as property. In business acquisitions, a value is assigned to “goodwill” associated with the business being acquired, even though consumer sentiment could change, and the company’s audience could turn against it.

Here, Mattocks had temporary access to a valuable audience through social media, and that access is valuable, even if it’s fleeting. There is no binding precedent (prior decisions the court must follow) because the question is new, at least in the context of Facebook Likes.

One of the most interesting cases that looked to address a similar issue head on was Phonedog vs. Kravitz, in which a business sued a former employee over Twitter followers. While working for Phonedog, Noah Kravitz had amassed a Twitter following of 17,000+, tweeting as “Phonedog_Noah.”

When Kravitz left the company, he changed his Twitter handle, but kept the followers. The company sued, claiming damages on the basis that those followers—which they valued at $2.50 each—belonged to Phonedog. The case ultimately settled, so businesses are left without much guidance in this area.

The larger question in my mind is who owned any purported interest: the particulars of any agreement between BET and Mattocks aren’t clear from the news reports.

Until we have more definitive case law or statutes on the books that address this area of law, here are some tips for clarifying ownership of social media feeds from the start:

Get it in writing.

Decide at the time of hiring who will own which social media feeds, and be as specific as possible. Reduce your agreement to a written contract, signed by the company and the employee.

You can also ask existing employees to sign a contract now. Continued employment should be enough to make the contract binding, but of course check with an attorney in your jurisdiction.

Use a company email to set up the account.

If your brand wants to own and control the social media presence, make sure you use a company email to create the accounts on Facebook, Twitter, and other sites. If an individual employee uses his or her personal email address to set up the account, you’ll have a difficult time gaining access to your social profiles if they leave the company. This benefits employees as well, who will be better able to maintain separation between their professional and personal profiles.

Write profiles that make it clear who owns the account.

If a Twitter account is the company’s, the profile should say that, and link to the company’s website, as opposed to the personal blog of the person who posts on the brand’s behalf.

Using a logo instead of a person’s photo drives this point home, but also dehumanizes your social media posts, as Mark Schaefer points out, so if you’d prefer to use a person’s picture as your avatar, consider adding a badge or icon.

Empowering employees and fans to engage in social media for your brand can improve online sentiment and supercharge your word of mouth marketing, but be clear about who owns the audience you’re building.

The post Like My Facebook Page? You’re Mine. #OWNED appeared first on Social Media Explorer.

The basics of intellectual property haven’t changed: you still own copyright in your photos. Moreover, you already gave Facebook “a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post,” even prior to the controversial changes being proposed.

You might want to give the current terms a look, because that language they use is pretty sweeping. You could also read my earlier post on who owns the social media content you post to the various networks.

The key point is this: Facebook already had the right use your images. You probably just didn’t realize it.

As was the case with Instagram’s much maligned (and ultimately reversed) terms of service update, the company hasn’t taken many new rights: it’s just clarified which rights you’ve already given up by using the service.

But this only covers intellectual property rights, and there are other laws marketers need to comply with when using images.

For instance, using images of children in advertising without parental permission could violate state and federal laws protecting minors. In fact, anyone whose image is used in ads would potentially have a claim against the advertiser if he or she did not sign a model release.

Most companies wouldn’t want to take on such expansive liability risks, so they’d likely stick to using profile photos (if anything).

Yes, Facebook could use your family photos in advertising, but they probably won’t (although they might use your profile picture). Yes, people could quit using Facebook, but they probably won’t.

So we’re all back to where we started, but with a clearer understanding of the virtual “skeleton key” we give social networks and other sites when we sign up for their “free” service.

Remember that you’re not paying for Facebook, which “is and always will be free.” (Personally, I think “free” in that phrase should be in quotes.) But if you’re not the customer, you’re the product, so don’t act surprised when the site tries to monetize the huge amount of brand related content that you upload on a daily basis.

If anything, be thankful for the reminder that you’re being willingly exploited to some degree. If you want to make absolutely certain that no one ever uses your photos without your express consent, I’d recommend unplugging from the Internet and taking up scrapbooking.

Barring that, change your privacy settings to opt out of having any of your content used in Facebook advertising. Navigating the process isn’t easy, but do it anyway. Putting the onus on users to do this may or may not ultimately be legal, but for now the responsibility to protect your information lies with you, so don’t drop the ball.

You might also want to refresh yourself on the current terms of service on Twitter, Instagram, and Pinterest, and make sure you understand what each site can do with your intellectual property. Forewarned is forearmed, as they say.

The post Facebook’s Photo Fiasco: Protecting Your Personal Images appeared first on Social Media Explorer.

Mistakes are part of doing business. Some mistakes result in annoyance (Apple Maps), others outrage (Instagram’s terms of service change). In some cases, a mistake becomes an international incident, like the Asiana airline crash in San Francisco that killed three people and injured dozens.

Heartfelt apologies work. Most customers and clients are willing to forgive mistakes, provided they feel heard and the problem is resolved. Why do some companies refuse to say “sorry,” or issue a watered-down statement so devoid of emotion as to make the situation worse?

In a word: lawsuits. Businesses fear that a simple “I’m sorry” will subject them to liability in a theoretical future lawsuit brought by the people they’ve ticked off. A handful of states have statutes protecting apologies, making them inadmissible as evidence in civil lawsuits. Many more states protect physicians’ apologies from being used against them in malpractice suits, although the statutes vary broadly in terms of what, exactly, a physician can say.

Statements of apology may still come into evidence during a lawsuit, depending on the jurisdiction in which you’re sued, but it’s unlikely that an apology alone would be enough evidence for you to be held liable.

The larger concern is that admitting liability might invalidate a company’s liability coverage. Many insurance policies deny coverage for claims if the insured admits or assumes liability without the insurance company’s express permission.

Clearly, money’s on the line, but some businesses don’t consider the amount of money they’ll lose if customers leave and don’t come back. In addition, apologies—when sincere and prompt—can sometimes resolve problems before litigation ensues.

From a legal standpoint, you were either responsible for the snafu or you weren’t. Either way, if your customers are unhappy because of you, you should apologize, at least for that fact alone. A simple “we’re very sorry for your frustration and inconvenience” is unlikely to impact your company’s prospects in a lawsuit, and a sincere apology might forestall the lawsuit altogether.

Something else to consider: everyone knows about your mistake anyway. Everyone with a smartphone has become a publisher, and mistakes are documented by multiple sources, sometimes going viral in minutes. These screw-ups live forever on the Internet. There are even websites dedicated to analyzing public statements of apology, judging who got it right and who made things worse.

This leads many to companies delay responding during a PR crisis, vetting draft after carefully honed draft before issuing any public statement. While they’re weighing word choices, people who’ve heard the story—many of whom are not even customers—become angrier and more vocal in their criticism.

But “getting it right” is an elusive prospect when it comes to public apologies. Despite scientific studies on the subject, opinions are sure to vary.

Some ways to improve your odds of a successful apology include having the right person apologize (most likely an executive or employee, as opposed to a PR professional). A polished statement from your publicist can seem glib and lack authenticity.

Also, be ready to actively engage in the conversation once people start responding to your statement. If you simply issue a statement and disappear, people will likely feel as though your apology wasn’t genuine.

Apologize, well and promptly, but stay current on the legal status of apologies in your state, as well as the terms of your insurance.

Otherwise, you really will be sorry.

The post “Sorry” Indeed: Why Most Company Apologies Suck appeared first on Social Media Explorer.

Sheriff B.J. Roberts of Hampton, Va., seems to think so. He fired five employees, including deputy Daniel Ray Carter Jr., for clicking the  “Like” button for the  “Jim Adams For Hampton Sheriff” page. Hampton was running against Roberts in a 2009 election. Carter and those supporting him feel that his actions should be protected by the constitution under the auspices of freedom of speech. The judge in the case has a different opinion, essentially saying that clicking a “Like” button is not a significant enough form of expression to be protected, thus allowing the firings.

When discussing this with Social Media Explorer CEO Jason Falls, he told me, “A ‘Like’ is nothing more than a virtual high-five and most in the industry don’t consider it a ringing endorsement of something. Yet the judge in this case says the lack of implicit statement means it isn’t speech. Ironically, that means the lack of implicit statement supports the notion it was a statement of endorsement – Kinda having it both ways. In the legal system, ambiguity normally leads to laws and rulings being stricken.”

When looking at the “Like” alone, I tend to agree with Jason. I mean, how many times have you clicked “Like” just to follow a brand page for instance? You’re essentially opting-in to let that brand share content to your news feed. Again, when you only look as far as the action of that single initial click this all seems trivial right? Not so much.

Facebook chimed in with a brief to the court on Carter’s case illustrating how much weight they feel a click of a “Like” button can bring. It said (legal mumbo-jumbo removed for ease of read):

“When Carter clicked the Like button on the Facebook Page entitled ‘Jim Adams for Hampton Sheriff,’ the words ‘Jim Adams for Hampton Sheriff’ and a photo of Adams appeared on Carter’s Facebook Profile in a list of Pages Carter had Liked …  the 21st-century equivalent of a front-yard campaign sign. In addition, an announcement that Carter likes the campaign’s Page was … shared with Carter’s Friends, and Carter’s name and photo appeared on the campaign’s Page in a list of people who Liked the Page … If Carter had stood on a street corner and announced, ‘I like Jim Adams for Hampton Sheriff,’ there would be no dispute that his statement was constitutionally protected speech. Carter made that very statement; the fact that he did it online, with a click of a computer’s mouse, does not deprive Carter’s speech of constitutional protection.”

See what happened there? It’s the chain reaction that happens after the “Like”. The dynamic of Facebook is that of a system that attempts to amplify social interactions in a way never before seen and still not duplicated. There are two main issues at hand here.

1. The average Facebook user’s perception of how far a “Like” travels on Facebook, where it appears and it’s lifespan anywhere Facebook’s social data may be accessible.
2. How the various parties (government, employers, law enforcement, friends, etc.) interpret the forms a “Like” can take when displayed on Facebook and possibly 3rd party sites and apps.

How Far a Like Travels

When working with clients I often take for granted my understanding of how social networks like Facebook work. I find myself having to break down how networks like Twitter and Facebook reach much farther than their web sites.

Facebook is the king of this approach. Thousands of apps and web sites use Facebook data as a way to augment and personalize your experience. They also use it as a way to authenticate who you are and make it easy to create an account on their 3rd party service. Looking inward instead of outward, I find that the average user doesn’t understand the various places on Facebook that their content is visible. Being head down in their own experience, they aren’t always privy to how others see their social interactions on the site.

Take the instance of Facebook’s relatively recent launch of timeline view for profiles. Out of site, out of mind … oh, until timeline revealed it all again. Your likes, all captured and catalogued for easy culling. Also, how many times have you gone back and looked at your profile to see what form the content you’ve shared or liked takes to others who might find it? I bet very rarely if at all.

Going back to the brief that Facebook filed, that initial “like” from Carter gave permission for a number of things to happen on their network. They called it, “the 21st-century equivalent of a front-yard campaign sign.” I would tend to agree.

How People Interpret a “Like”

It’s obvious by this court case and other various opinions  there isn’t a clear-cut way people interpret a Facebook “Like.” I, for the most part, always tell clients and folks at speaking gigs that a Like, retweet, share and other seemingly minor social media interactions should be considered endorsements.When sharing/resharing a piece of content or giving it a virtual thumbs up, it is more likely than not going to be seen as a personal endorsement of that content. This is, of course, one of the many things that make social media such a powerful medium for marketing. The social action combined by the transient trust that is passed on by a friend, influencer or family member amplify the perception of the one that receives it. A “Like,” retweet or share alone without any additional commentary leaves a bit to interpretation.

This all boils down to who is interpreting the social interaction. Are they someone in the “know” or are they someone completely unfamiliar with social media? As long as you have a clear understanding of how your customers or community interprets these social media interactions then you’re O.K., but legally these interactions are still being interpreted. As Jason said, “In the legal system, ambiguity normally leads to laws and rulings being stricken.” In business, legal implications dictate a lot of what’s possible and with social a part of your brand messaging, marketing and communications strategy, it’s only a matter of time before even something as small as a “like” might be cause for a review of your social media policy or input from legal.

 Do You Like this?

Needless to say, I try to take the “better safe than sorry” approach to liking on Facebook. I generally believe that  a “Like” can express quite a bit, especially to those you influence. So when does even the smallest of social media interactions become significant human expression? It sounds like the courts are deciding case by case and it won’t be long before law makers follow.

The post When Does Social Media Interaction Become Human Expression? appeared first on Social Media Explorer.