Several social media sites, such as Meta and Twitter, have built-in ad managers that allow attorneys to pay to advertise their legal services using the social media platform.  However, attorneys should proceed cautiously.   Before using one of these social media ad campaign tools, we suggest consulting State Bar Formal Opinion No. 1995-142, which discusses direct mail marketing and outlines considerations for complying with California Rules of Professional Conduct (“CRPC”) 7.1, 7.2 and 7.3.

Through an ad manager tool on a social media platform, attorneys can pay for help creating ads and promoting them to any of their current connections as well as to the general public. Some attorneys use these services to attract new business by publicizing their accomplishments, such as winning a big case, or highlighting their firm’s specialty. The social media site takes the attorney-provided content and uses algorithms to target an audience most likely to be interested in these ads.

CRPC 7.1, which addresses the content allowed in advertising legal services, states that a lawyer shall not make a false or misleading communication about the lawyer or the lawyer’s services.  See also Bus. & Prof. Code sections 6157 et seq.  So the first rule of thumb, regardless of the social media site an attorney is using for legal advertising, is to be completely truthful and to not mislead or dramatize the risks, business transaction liabilities, or potential outcomes of any case or other legal matter.

CRPC 7.2 presents another concern.  While the rule allows advertising through any written or electronic means, it also requires that lawyers not compensate or give anything of value to a person for the purpose of recommending or securing their legal services.  CRPC 7.2 (a),(b).  There are a few exceptions to this rule, but the key takeaway is that attorneys should create their own content and ensure that their ads do not suggest that the social media company is actually recommending their services.

Attorneys should also consider CRPC 7.3, which clarifies that most communications do not constitute a solicitation if they are directed to the general public (such as through a billboard, an Internet banner advertisement, a website, or a television commercial), or if they are responding to a request for information or are automatically generated in response to Internet searches. CRPC 7.3, Comment [1]. In addition, CRPC 7.3 has adopted exceptions to solicitation bans for prospective clients with whom the lawyer has a family, close personal, or prior professional relationship. CRPC 7.3(a)(2). However, keep in mind that a lawyer cannot solicit professional employment to anyone who has made it known that they desire not to be solicited. CRPC 7.3(b).

The bottom line is that truthful and non-deceptive direct online marketing of legal services to prospective clients is likely permissible so long as the attorney is creating the content and using the service merely for distribution, i.e. not paying for a recommendation or a referral, and otherwise complies with the ethical rules, including CRPC 7.1, 7.2 and 7.3.

By Nicole Engler