Law Journal Newsletters

An ALM Website

The Red Zone

LAW FIRM MARKETING AND DIVERSITY

By Allan Colman, CEO, the Closers Group: acolman@closersgroup.com

  • E-Mail this Article
  • View Printable Article

LAW FIRM MARKETING AND DIVERSITY concludes this series. Efforts to overcome a client's mis-understandings of the value diversity brings can be divided into two fundamental approaches. First, understanding the client. You know his/her predilections on a sensitive social issue. Because you know them, you are able to create a marketing message that balances the equation and maintains the relationships on both ends, with him and with other buyers who have very different predilections.

Second, and on the other hand, understanding that marketing is all about delivering value. You don't need to convert him philosophically. You need to show why something that's important to you is simultaneously essential to him/her.

If all fails because your client or client target are actually sexists or racists ... well, to hell with them?

Comments

Be the first to comment on this post using the section below.

Add your comments

Log In

You must be logged in to comment

Register

Enter your information below to begin your FREE registration

MOST POPULAR ARTICLES

COMMERCIAL LEASING LAW & STRATEGY

Office vs. Retail Leasing: Practical Considerations for the Retail Tenant

Experienced retail tenants are generally well versed in commonly negotiated retail provisions such as those pertaining to exclusive use rights, opening and operating co-tenancies, "go-dark" rights and percentage rent. This article discusses some of the material differences between common leasing concepts addressed in both retail and office leases.

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY STRATEGIST

A Blurry Distinction with a Huge Difference: Commercial vs. Non-Commercial Speech

Imagine the following two scenarios, and try to figure out what the real difference is. First, your competitor blatantly lies in its advertising about the effectiveness of its products; second, your competitor blatantly lies to a reporter about the effectiveness of its products, and the reporter publishes the lies in an article or in a magazine. It seems like the same situation, but it is not. With the first, you could sue for false advertising because the advertisement is “commercial” speech, whereas with the second, you cannot because the magazine article is “non-commercial” speech. A similar difference is presented if a newspaper uses a picture of a celebrity without the celebrity’s consent to highlight a news article, as opposed to a company using the same celebrity picture in a print advertisement, in the same newspaper, to promote the company. A breach of the celebrity’s right of publicity claim is not available against the newspaper because the news article is “non-commercial,” but is available against the company because the print advertisement is “commercial.” The rationale for both is that while the First Amendment fully protects “non-commercial” speech, it protects “commercial’ speech in a significantly limited way.

Tweets