Despite Debate, Complaints Sparse Over TV Attorneys

Rick Woods uses television commercials to improve his business, and believes the fact he’s a lawyer is irrelevant.

r

“And here’s why,” said Woods, the senior partner at Woods, Snively, Atwell Law Firm in Fayetteville. “I’m not apologetic for trying to grow a successful business. Television advertising has become acceptable in my opinion, and you’re seeing more and more of it.”

r

The notion of lawyers using any medium to advertise their services has historically been frowned upon by the legal community. An attorney, the thinking went, was part of a dignified profession that should not be tarnished. A strong clientele was to be built by word-of-mouth advertising, becoming a pillar of the community and earning respect.

r

Advertising on TV also was once illegal.

r

Since then the scope of television, as well as advertising and the legal profession, has changed. Television ads have become more professionally produced and are created with a specific demographic in mind.

r

Some still are against it, but television advertising for lawyers is becoming more common.

r

“I really think that was more of an attitude 10 years ago,” said Conrad Odom, a practicing lawyer for 20 years and a partner at the Odom Law Firm in Fayetteville. “The advertising I see today is quality ads run by quality firms. I think, especially with the quality going up, that the attitude has changed a little bit … or significantly, actually.”

r

 

r

‘Traditionalism Basically Lost’

r

Howard Brill, a professor of legal ethics and professional responsibility at the University of Arkansas, was a practicing attorney before coming to Fayetteville in 1975.

r

He recalled his two-year stint at a firm in Rock Island, Ill., as a time of strict limits on lawyers who sought to publicize their services. But in 1977, a Supreme Court decision (Bates vs. State Bar of Arizona) ruled that denying an attorney the right to advertise was a violation of the First Amendment.

r

During the next 10 years, Brill said, the limitations essentially went away.

r

“The court said that the public has a right to have information and lawyers have a right to provide it,” Brill said. “The proponents of traditionalism basically lost.”

r

Depending on the type of law practice, the type of prospects being targeted, the funding available for advertising and the image portrayed to fellow attorneys, Brill said there are any number of factors that can drive a decision to hit the airwaves.

r

As for Brill?

r

“I don’t know; I’m a pretty traditional sort of guy,” he said. “I don’t know that I would be doing much advertising.”

r

 

r

Two Sides Of The Aisle

r

Those who see benefits in television advertising argue it ensures those in need of representation are aware of their legal rights. The commercials relay services, rates and qualifications, and that’s no different than how other businesses utilize the free-enterprise system.

r

Those on the other side of the aisle contend “television lawyers” can be a disgrace to the profession and those who promote themselves with a less-than-professional product are concerned with making money first and serving their clients second.

r

“I think both of those statements can be accurate,” Woods said. “You will find ads that are informative. There are others that come to mind, and I don’t know how to say it other than this, that are demeaning to the profession.”

r

Woods, who began advertising with television commercials within the past year, said his firm has an advertising budget of $100,000 per year. His guess is that 30 percent of that goes to television commercials.

r

Woods, Snively, Atwell has two commercials in circulation and is preparing to shoot a third. The firm buys 30 to 50 spots per month on NBC affiliate KNWA in Northwest Arkansas.

r

Woods said his firm’s spots run primarily during the “Today” show in the morning and the afternoon judge’s shows — “Judge Joe Brown” and “Judge Judy.”

r

 

r

Quality Is Key

r

The Odom Law Firm has six lawyers led by founder Bobby Lee Odom, a practicing attorney since 1970. The firm began advertising with television commercials about six years ago.

r

“When you see Bobby Odom advertising, that tells you times have changed,” Woods said.

r

Conrad Odom was not a huge proponent of using television to promote the firm established by his father, but understood it could provide a valuable service.

r

Whether it was responsible for gaining clients is hard to say, he said, but not using television to its advantage caused the firm to lose clients.

r

“Truthfully, I can’t tell you whether or not it has been effective in bringing in additional clients,” Conrad Odom said. “What we did find was that prior to (using television commercials), we had other clients who we had previously represented, who had a new event in their life, had gotten a different attorney because of their TV ad and for one reason or another had not been happy with their services. We were losing some of our former clients because of that and that used to be a larger segment of our business. Therefore we thought we needed to do some good, quality advertising.”

r

Maintaining high-quality production standards should be a top priority for any commercial, Odom said. It can otherwise be unbecoming to the profession.

r

 

r

Opinions Likely Won’t Change

r

Wayne Young, owner of the Wayne Young Law Firm in Fayetteville, has used television to advertise since 2006, first in Northwest Arkansas and later adding the Little Rock market. He opened shop in 2002. His firm also employs three associate attorneys and has offices in Fort Smith and Little Rock.

r

Without divulging any return on investment or any advertising budget, Young said television advertising works.

r

“It works or lawyers wouldn’t do it,” he said.

r

Like other attorneys, Young understands why using a television commercial to add clients might be questioned, both by colleagues and the public.

r

“Obviously, I would hope all lawyers want to help their client,” Young said. “The way I look at TV advertising is from the perspective that folks who are going to think that lawyers are in it just for the money are predisposed to that opinion no matter what we do, whether I run an ad or not.”

r

Presently, Young doesn’t have commercials in circulation, but he’s always trying to be observant of others in the market. He said a current commercial featuring Springdale attorney Ray Schlegel of the Rogers law firm Nolan, Caddell & Reynolds sets the bar high for helpful, professional advertising.

r

“I can easily cite one of my competitors, which I probably shouldn’t do, as the perfect example of the right way to do legal advertising and give good information,” Young said.

r

 

r

Complaints Are Scarce

r

Rule 7.2 of the Arkansas Model Rules of Professional Conduct states that “a lawyer may advertise services through public media, such as a telephone directory, legal directory, newspaper or other periodical, outdoor advertising, radio or television, or through written communications.”

r

There are several stipulations to the rule, including a record of the advertisement must be kept for five years. Actors are not to be used (unless identified as such), re-enactments are not allowed and fake testimonials are forbidden, as is the use of past or current clients. A commercial also shouldn’t create an expectation of recovery.

r

“Those are the ads that make me cringe,” Young said. “A brain injury … $1.5 million verdict. Those are the kinds of things we want to avoid.”

r

The practice is self-regulating. It is monitored only to the extent of receiving a complaint about a piece of advertising. In his position as executive director of the Arkansas Supreme Court on Professional Conduct, Stark Ligon said any objections about content are few and far between.

r

“I’ve been here 10 years,” Ligon said. “Given the amount of advertising just that I see — phone, newspapers, magazines, television, billboards, whatever — I am kind of surprised at how few complaints we actually receive.

r

“There just aren’t that many.”  

r