Encourage the client to contact you to resolve the concerns expressed (this could be done online or offline). As Davis points out, “not every opinion (on the Internet) must be contested.” If, however, you feel you must respond, Davis offers three ethically permissible approaches: Provide clients with professional and competent work product. Use disclaimers when participating in online legal forums. Contribute accurate and valuable information regarding yourself and your firm. See Oregon RPC 1.8(a), and 16 CFR Part 255 relating to FTC regulation of endorsements. Offer incentives for a positive review without considering the ethical and legal implications. Fail to screen for conflicts in an online legal forum. Form an unintended attorney-client relationship in an online legal forum. Attempt to restrict clients from posting negative reviews. Sue the source of the negative review for defamation. Engage in real-time interactions that violate in-person solicitation rules. Fail to promptly update information when it changes. 
Use subterfuge (employees posing as satisfied clients offering glowing reviews).Allow misleading information that creates false expectations regarding fees, results, or your firm’s resources.Reveal information relating to the representation of a client.Also included are my two cents on best practice recommendations.
#Sookasa for education how to
The following excerpt describes what you cannot do, what you should not do, how to preempt negative reviews, and how to respond to a negative review. While Davis’ article focuses on ethical dos and don’ts, it also contains solid practical advice. The July issue of the Oregon State Bar Bulletin features an excellent article by Linn Davis entitled “ Responding to Negative Online Reviews: Reputation Management.” If you’ve ever received a negative review, or fear that negative content is inevitable, this post is for you.
0 kommentar(er)
