May
1
2012
By Jeff Weiner, Orlando Sentinel
12:07 a.m. EST, May 1, 2012
Usually, when a teenager is shot in Central Florida, the people of Los Angeles, New York or London don’t take to the streets, as they did to protest the shooting of 17-year-old Trayvon Martin.
But Twitter carried the teen’s name across the globe. Social media turned a fatal shooting in Sanford into a rallying cry, and helped organize a popular uprising that spread like wildfire. Since, each new development has been analyzed and deconstructed by thousands online.
Now, defense attorneys for George Zimmerman, the Neighborhood Watch volunteer charged in the teen’s death, have entered the virtual conversation. In an unusual move, Mark O’Mara has started a blog and accompanying Twitter and Facebook accounts to communicate directly with the public.
“This is a brilliant move on his part,” says Amy Singer, a Gainesville-based trial consultant. By engaging the public online, “you get a lot of comments, a lot of perspectives, a lot of discussion.”
And Singer should know: During the Casey Anthony trial, she analyzed more than 40,000 tweets and comments for Anthony’s defense, gauging the public’s reaction to various arguments and tactics.
Because thousands of people give their opinions unsolicited through social media, services such as Twitter can put a defense team in the enviable position of being “a fly on the wall,” Singer said, monitoring how people react to each twist and turn.
O’Mara, she said, has just taken the next logical step. By creating a Facebook and Twitter profile, “all that they’re doing is joining in the conversation” already taking place online.
On the blog, GZLegalCase.com, O’Mara’s firm acknowledges it is “unusual” to “maintain a social media presence on behalf of a defendant.”
“First, we contend that social media in this day and age cannot be ignored,” the site says. “We feel it would be irresponsible to ignore the robust online conversation, and we feel equally as strong about establishing a professional, responsible, and ethical approach to new media.”
The website has a blog-style format, with posts in reverse chronological order. The Twitter account, @GzlegalCase, has been used to tweet links to blog posts and discredit imitators. On Facebook, Zimmerman’s defense solicited reader input on the subject of $200,000 in donations Zimmerman gathered through his original website. More than 300 people have responded.
O’Mara did not respond to numerous requests for comment.
However, late Monday, Zimmerman’s defense posted an update on its blog in response to “a lot of press today regarding the online presence we have put in place for the defense of George Zimmerman.” In the post, Zimmerman’s legal team acknowledges that its use of social media is “relatively unprecedented.”
“We repeat our contention that social media in this day and age cannot be ignored, and it would be, in fact, irresponsible to ignore the robust online conversation,” the new post says. The post goes on to explain that O’Mara’s office was deluged with requests after he took on the case, and social media “is the obvious answer.”
However, the post says the defense team won’t use its online presence “as a vehicle” either to comment on or disclose evidence in the case, nor to “comment on the character of” Trayvon Martin or his family or supporters.
Hemu Nigam, an Internet-safety expert and former Los Angeles deputy district attorney, said social media have given everyday people caught in high-profile controversies the opportunity to control their message in a way that used to require a public-relations firm.
“What you can now do, even if you are a person on the street, is try to own the facts,” Nigam said.
You can also influence people’s opinions. Nigam described social media as the water cooler of the 21st century — except unlike the office oasis, anyone can enter the conversation.
Kevin O’Keefe is a Seattle-based former lawyer and CEO of LexBlog, a company that specializes in helping lawyers develop “powerful Internet identities” through social media. He also writes about social-media issues in his blog, “Real Lawyers Have Blogs.”
O’Keefe said the transition to social media is an evolution. In the past, if an attorney wanted to bolster his client, “you’d go out and talk to the media,” but now, people look elsewhere for information.
“They’re going to get it through people they trust: via Facebook, via Twitter,” he said.
But will the Zimmerman defense be allowed to keep tweeting? Nigam said the prosecution in the case may argue for the judge to halt the social-media outreach through a gag order.
In fact, Assistant State Attorney Bernie de la Rionda has already filed a motion asking Seminole Circuit Judge Kenneth Lester to prohibit lawyers associated with the case from talking about the facts or evidence or giving opinions in the media. Lester decided against ruling on the motion in a hearing last week.
Copyright © 2012, Orlando Sentinel
Click here for original article.
April
25
2012
By Amy Singer, Ph.D. and Diana Greninger
George Zimmerman, the white Hispanic man who shot an African American teenager, Trayvon Martin, was charged with second degree murder and arrested on April 11, 2012.
The shooting took place in Sanford, Florida more than six weeks earlier on February 26, 2012. Martin was a 17 year old high school student, walking back to his father’s girlfriend’s residence after going to the store to buy a bag of Skittles and a can of iced tea. Zimmerman, a 28 year old man was a self-appointed neighborhood watch captain, and holder of a concealed weapon license when he shot Martin in what he claims was self-defense.
Attorneys, public figures and the general public are eagerly anticipating what trial strategies will be employed. There are many unknown facts about this case. One aspect of this case however appears obvious as a key issue. How will race influence the jury’s decisions? How will a jury factor in the race of the shooter, the victim’s race, the racial component of public advocates from both sides {Sean Hannity vs. Al Sharpton}, and finally the racial makeup within the jury itself?
A Reuters/Ipsos poll released last week found that 91 percent of black Americans believe Martin was killed unjustly. The same poll showed that 35 percent of Whites and 59 percent of Latinos also felt Martin was killed unjustly. The remainder believed the shooting was either justifiable or they were not sure what to think based on the limited amount of factual information available. The trial consultant’s challenge will be to answer this question: What is the common thread shared by the 9 percent of black Americans and 65 percent of white Americans who each answered that Zimmerman was justified in shooting Martin?
Contrast the Zimmerman case to the Werdesheim case in Baltimore. Perhaps you haven’t heard about it. The facts are basically the same. Two Jewish men beat up an African American male. They will go to trial claiming self-defense. Clearly, race is not a predictor variable in this Baltimore case! So what is the difference between the two cases?
One difference is that the two Baltimore men were quickly arrested after the incident. Furthermore, law enforcement officials emphasized that the neighborhood watch’s job was to call the police and go no further. They noted that when these rules are followed there are few confrontations. Another major difference is that we do not know what was going through the minds of these two Jewish defendants.
In the Zimmerman case we have a 911 tape to suggest what Zimmerman may have been perceiving and thinking. But whatever Zimmerman was thinking is being interpreted very differently by different people. Perhaps the answer lies in a study, based on a Washington Post-ABC News poll. This study suggests that “African Americans overwhelmingly see the criminal justice system as stacked against Blacks and other minorities, but Whites are far more divided on the matter.” The study focuses on the criminal justice system as a whole and how perceptions will impact this case. This poll found 8 in 10 Blacks say they think Martin’s killing was not justified, compared with 38 percent of Whites, very close to the 91 percent and 35 percent figures in the Reuters/Ipsos study: Most Whites say they do not know enough about the shooting to say whether it was justified.
Clearly a majority of African Americans have different value beliefs about law enforcement as a result of their life experiences compared to a majority of white Americans. Other variables are identified in the 911 tape. How do individuals from each race perceive threat? What exactly does “suspicious” mean to them? Would prospective jurors describe Martin’s behavior as suspicious or indicative of being on drugs? Would they follow someone who looked suspicious or simply call the police and avoid interaction? Would prospective jurors confront someone who is following them? Would they stand their ground if they were being followed? How confrontational is the prospective juror? What value beliefs does the prospective juror have about guns, self-defense, threat and protection? Do they own a gun? Under what conditions would they use it?
Who does a prospective juror identify with? Rallies supporting Trayvon Martin chanted the slogan, “We are Trayvon Martin.” Individuals who identify with Martin simply cannot begin to imagine why someone wearing a hoodie would appear to be a threat to an unbiased person.
Certainly we can see a trend in those individuals who disidentify with Zimmerman. Those individuals are more likely to bolster their opinions by looking for contradictions in his actions versus his explanations. For example, those individuals are quick to point out that on the 911 tape, Zimmerman states that he thought Martin was in his late teens. During his bond hearing however, he stated that he thought Martin was a little bit younger than the 28 year old Zimmerman. Imagine how differently this same piece of evidence will be interpreted by people who identify with Zimmerman.
Sadly, the relevance that race has in this case points out once again that based on the color of one’s skin, not all individuals share the same civil rights. Zimmerman/Martin brings home to us that the majority of African Americans have very different life experiences and resulting perceptions. We also know that value beliefs differ because of the color of one’s skin. But I think we already knew that. As uncomfortable as it is to admit, we must recognize that racists come in all colors and we still find many who are comfortable with segregation 50 years after federal civil rights legislation. Perhaps, this tragedy will bring people together and revitalize the civil rights movement.
In the final analysis, race will not be a predictor variable in the Zimmerman case. Scientific jury selection encompasses the ability to identify relevant perceptions that will predict verdict behavior and profile which prospective juror is likely to perceive testimony and evidence in a given way. The prosecution and defense must look beyond the color of one’s skin and dig deeper into the psyche of the people who will “speak the truth.”
April
24
2012
By Amy Singer, Ph.D. and Diana Greninger
George Zimmerman, the white Hispanic man who shot an African American teenager, Trayvon Martin, was charged with second degree murder and arrested on April 11, 2012.
The shooting took place in Sanford, Florida more than six weeks earlier on February 26, 2012. Martin was a 17 year old high school student, walking back to his father’s girlfriend’s residence after going to the store to buy a bag of Skittles and a can of iced tea. Zimmerman, a 28 year old man was a self-appointed neighborhood watch captain, and holder of a concealed weapon license when he shot Martin in what he claims was self-defense.
Attorneys, public figures and the general public are eagerly anticipating what trial strategies will be employed. There are many unknown facts about this case. One aspect of this case however appears obvious as a key issue. How will race influence the jury’s decisions? How will a jury factor in the race of the shooter, the victim’s race, the racial component of public advocates from both sides {Sean Hannity vs. Al Sharpton}, and finally the racial makeup within the jury itself?
A Reuters/Ipsos poll released last week found that 91 percent of black Americans believe Martin was killed unjustly. The same poll showed that 35 percent of Whites and 59 percent of Latinos also felt Martin was killed unjustly. The remainder believed the shooting was either justifiable or they were not sure what to think based on the limited amount of factual information available. The trial consultant’s challenge will be to answer this question: What is the common thread shared by the 9 percent of black Americans and 65 percent of white Americans who each answered that Zimmerman was justified in shooting Martin?
Contrast the Zimmerman case to the Werdesheim case in Baltimore. Perhaps you haven’t heard about it. The facts are basically the same. Two Jewish men beat up an African American male. They will go to trial claiming self-defense. Clearly, race is not a predictor variable in this Baltimore case! So what is the difference between the two cases?
One difference is that the two Baltimore men were quickly arrested after the incident. Furthermore, law enforcement officials emphasized that the neighborhood watch’s job was to call the police and go no further. They noted that when these rules are followed there are few confrontations. Another major difference is that we do not know what was going through the minds of these two Jewish defendants.
In the Zimmerman case we have a 911 tape to suggest what Zimmerman may have been perceiving and thinking. But whatever Zimmerman was thinking is being interpreted very differently by different people. Perhaps the answer lies in a study, based on a Washington Post-ABC News poll. This study suggests that “African Americans overwhelmingly see the criminal justice system as stacked against Blacks and other minorities, but Whites are far more divided on the matter.” The study focuses on the criminal justice system as a whole and how perceptions will impact this case. This poll found 8 in 10 Blacks say they think Martin’s killing was not justified, compared with 38 percent of Whites, very close to the 91 percent and 35 percent figures in the Reuters/Ipsos study: Most Whites say they do not know enough about the shooting to say whether it was justified.
Clearly a majority of African Americans have different value beliefs about law enforcement as a result of their life experiences compared to a majority of white Americans. Other variables are identified in the 911 tape. How do individuals from each race perceive threat? What exactly does “suspicious” mean to them? Would prospective jurors describe Martin’s behavior as suspicious or indicative of being on drugs? Would they follow someone who looked suspicious or simply call the police and avoid interaction? Would prospective jurors confront someone who is following them? Would they stand their ground if they were being followed? How confrontational is the prospective juror? What value beliefs does the prospective juror have about guns, self-defense, threat and protection? Do they own a gun? Under what conditions would they use it?
Who does a prospective juror identify with? Rallies supporting Trayvon Martin chanted the slogan, “We are Trayvon Martin.” Individuals who identify with Martin simply cannot begin to imagine why someone wearing a hoodie would appear to be a threat to an unbiased person.
Certainly we can see a trend in those individuals who disidentify with Zimmerman. Those individuals are more likely to bolster their opinions by looking for contradictions in his actions versus his explanations. For example, those individuals are quick to point out that on the 911 tape, Zimmerman states that he thought Martin was in his late teens. During his bond hearing however, he stated that he thought Martin was a little bit younger than the 28 year old Zimmerman. Imagine how differently this same piece of evidence will be interpreted by people who identify with Zimmerman.
Sadly, the relevance that race has in this case points out once again that based on the color of one’s skin, not all individuals share the same civil rights. Zimmerman/Martin brings home to us that the majority of African Americans have very different life experiences and resulting perceptions. We also know that value beliefs differ because of the color of one’s skin. But I think we already knew that. As uncomfortable as it is to admit, we must recognize that racists come in all colors and we still find many who are comfortable with segregation 50 years after federal civil rights legislation. Perhaps, this tragedy will bring people together and revitalize the civil rights movement.
In the final analysis, race will not be a predictor variable in the Zimmerman case. Scientific jury selection encompasses the ability to identify relevant perceptions that will predict verdict behavior and profile which prospective juror is likely to perceive testimony and evidence in a given way. The prosecution and defense must look beyond the color of one’s skin and dig deeper into the psyche of the people who will “speak the truth.”
April
12
2012
by Amy Singer, Ph.D.
Obviously, direct examinations are important because they are the only way to tell our story and thereby persuade the trier of fact of the rightness of our position. (1) As once told to Robert Sullivan and Bob Langdon by a successful trial lawyer: “An expert is not going to win your case for you, but he sure can lose it.” (2)
I asked the leading experts and attorneys in the country to tell me what tips they have for preparing your expert for direct examination.
Here is what they told me:
There are five main aspects to focus on when preparing your expert witness for direct examination:
1- Giving: What will you give them?
2- Getting: What you must get from your expert, in order for her or him to be effective.
3- Seeing: What does the jury need to see while your witness is testifying?
4- Listening: What does the jury need to hear to understand your side?
5- Story telling: Good lawyers are master story tellers. Great lawyers make their experts sound like master story tellers.
GIVING
Here is what you give your expert to prepare him or her. I call this the “expert’s tool box”:
- Give your witness a clear idea of your goals and a clear understanding of what you need and why you selected them. Let them know what you need them to say, within the confines of the truth, of course, and what information can be damaging and therefore should be avoided. (3)
- Cross examine your own witness on the stand. This takes the wind out of your opponent’s sail and gives your expert an opportunity to explain those issues that can be easily misinterpreted.
- Prepare your witness as much as possible and make sure they have reviewed all the materials in their file. Do not assume they will do this on their own. (4)
- Teach your witness the “magic words” or legal standard he or she needs to testify to. For example, in a personal injury case the expert must testify with “a reasonable degree of medical certainty.” (5) It is also imperative for your witness to understand the difference between medical causation and legal causation. (6) Other key words include probability vs. possibility, reasonable certainty, unreasonably dangerous, standard of care, defect, among many others. (7)
- Create an outline for testimony and stick to the sequence of questions you have outlined for your witness. (8) The last thing you want to do is throw your witness off.
- Make sure that you review the entire contents of your expert’s file with them to avoid any potential impeachment evidence. (9)
- Organized file folders with tabs so experts can go directly where they need to and avoid stumbling around. (10)
GETTING
The expert witness is called that for a reason. Here is what you must get from your expert in order to present your case in a successful manner:
- Give your experts an opportunity to reveal their weaknesses. Most attorneys research their expert witnesses before preparing them for trial. Of course you want to make sure they do not have a history of being vulnerable to attack from the other side. However, be careful not to miss an opportunity to learn about your witness’ other strengths and weakness by going directly to the source. After you have gained your expert’s trust, ask them point blank: What are your weaknesses? If they tell you they don’t have any, get another expert (give them the boot). Once they reveal their own vulnerabilities you can deal with them together. (11) Address any potential problem ahead of time, not right before the witness is going on the stand. (4) More on this when we review the general tips.
- Make sure you know everything about a potential expert witness prior to hiring them. Ask them about his or her prior experiences, if he or she knows your opponent, if he or she has testified for your opponent, if he or she have written any papers or articles that contradict the opinion they are giving you. (12) You can find an expert for pretty much any issue in your case – the problem is you often do. (2)
- The truth. First and foremost, your expert must be truthful. The truth is always consistent. Jurors like consistency. (13) Jurors look for inconsistencies and when they find them, they are unforgiving.
- Listen carefully…and wait until the entire question is asked. (13)
- Answer only the question that was asked. (13)
- Have your witness provide you with a list of questions they need you to ask in order to provide the information necessary for a complete and accurate explanation. I call this “playing Jeopardy!®” with your witness; Once you have established what the jury needs to hear, give your expert the answers and ask him or her what the question is. Use those questions in court.
SEEING
As we all know, a picture is worth a thousand words. It will not hurt for your expert witness to have access to demonstrative aids. Knowledge can only be imparted by seeing. Language by itself is meaningless since language is nothing more than symbols. In order for the jury to “know” they need to see what the expert is trying to teach them. Jurors will not find for what they do not understand:
- Bridge the knowledge gap by use of visual aids and analogies. (2)
- Set some time aside to work with your witness and graphic designer to create power points, scale models and exhibits for them to use in court. Use graphics, trial presentation solutions, media, assistive aids and even demonstratives to ensure testimonial variety during the presentation to obtain greater attention and focused explanation of his or her opinion. (14)
- It is imperative for your expert witness to face the jury and look them in the eye when answering your questions. The jury members are the ones who need answers in order to make a decision on your case. This is so simple, yet so influential. (15)
- Provide compelling side by side visuals comparing what a product should have done and what a defective product did.
- Use a combination of high tech electronic presentation and low tech display boards. (1) Make sure all documents are legible.
- In court, stand in a place where the jury can see both your witness and the visual aids they are using. (1)
- Make sure your expert witness dresses appropriately and cleans up before going to testify, if necessary. “The best prepared expert limits their value as a direct witness with an off-putting personality; a disheveled appearance; an excessively sweaty brow; an irritating cough; or a voice akin to the proverbial nails on the chalkboard. In the attorney’s quest to find the most qualified and least expensive expert, the attorney should be mindful of the personal demeanor of the expert.” (16) Ultimately, you want the most qualified expert at a fair cost. Do not forfeit dollars to earn pennies. (17)
LISTENING
Jurors will listen to your expert and evaluate his or her credibility. What does the jury need to hear and how do they need to hear it?
You should coach your witness to speak in a way that is appealing to jurors. Make sure your witness can answer the questions, “why am I here?” and “why are we right?”
Jurors will hear everything but you want them to listen to the key information:
- Teach, don’t preach. (18)
- Give juror’s the reader’s digest version. (18)
- Jurors appreciate concise and organized presentations – make sure your expert can give one. (19) An electronic presentation on a large screen can help reinforce what your expert says with what the jurors see on the screen. (17)
- Encourage your expert to sprinkle in information about his or her accomplishments throughout the examination. This will give your witness more credibility. (11)
- Jurors are more likely to believe your witness if they are saying “this sounds like common sense.” (20) One of the best ways to simplify complex concepts is by explaining them through the use of analogies and providing effective demonstrative aids so your jurors can visualize the concept.
STORY TELLING
Half the fun of listening to a good story is becoming engaged in the presentation.
- Engage your jurors (students) by explaining all your basic premises before moving on to advanced concepts. Show your work in writing, smile and be engaging. (21)
- Focus on three main ideas, as that seems to be what most people can store easily in their memory box. Suggest that your expert let the jury know when to focus on a point by starting his or her sentence with “this is important” and then using a visual aid to drive the message across. (2)
- Make sure your expert witness’ testimony fits into the story you are telling the jurors.
- Ensure your witness understands that they are one piece in the “large jig-saw puzzle of the trial”. (22) However, make sure they understand the entire case.
- Ensure your witness presents her or his opinion in context that corroborates persuasiveness of the issue. (14)
- Ensure your expert witness’ testimony weaves in the theme of your case. (23)
- Set the stage for jurors by giving your witness a good introduction.
- Tell the story to alert jurors – preferably in the morning.
GENERAL TIPS
When you have multiple expert witnesses testifying, lead with your best punch. Your first witness should be strong, as they will give an overview of what facts jurors need to understand in order to arrive at a favorable decision.
The key is for your expert to always explain the “why” to show jurors: why we are right. Role play with them as if you are the host and they are the guest in a television interview. Ask them to teach you everything you need to know. (24) Let the witness prepare you. (25)
Play clips of opposing expert’s deposition and ask your expert if they agree or disagree. This way you are able to cross examine their expert through direct exam of your expert and take the wind out of their sail by asking your expert the “why “question. (26)
Instruct your expert witness on how to answer complex questions. For example, as lawyers you know the difference between subjective and objective findings but the jury may not, so don’t be afraid to follow with, “What is the difference between subjective and objective, Doctor?” (10) The Kabbalah of litigation teaches us that words are just symbols; your expert should use analogies to explain complex concepts.
Another option is to follow expert Doug Carner’s advice:
“Ever since I began providing extremely detailed written reports, every case has been dismissed or settled without requiring my testimony. With over a 1,000 cases under my belt, this has been a huge cost savings for my clients and time savings for the courts. This has the added benefit of increasing my revenue since I make more money in the lab than I do in testimony.” (27)
Finally, remind your witness to bring all their materials with them and make sure your witness is willing and able to stay at the courthouse for as long as necessary. (12)
Bibliography
1. Russell S. Jones, Esq. Top 10 Things to Know about Persuasive Direct Examination. [Online] (2012). http://dritoday.org/feature.aspx?id=306&goback=%2Egde_4032205_member_103653073.
2. Robert Sullivan, Esq. and Bob Langdon, Esq. Developing Memorable Expert Testimony. [Online] (2008). http://www.smctriallawyers.com/documents/articles/Trial.Article_.10_.08_.pdf.
3. Nora Rousso, Esq.
4. Stephen Sambol, Esq.
5. Jeffrey Lapin, Esq.
6. Barry Snyder, Esq.
7. Ed Van Dorn, Esq.
8. Jack Murray, Expert.
9. Thomas Nielsen, Esq.
10. Wayne Partenheimer, Esq.
11. Stuart Ollanik, Esq.
12. David O’Dea, Esq.
13. Irwin Kramer, Esq. Ten Tips for Testimony: Preparing for the Witness Stand. [Online] (2010). [Cited: ] http://www.avvo.com/legal-guides/ugc/ten-tips-for-testimony-preparing-for-the-witness-stand.
14. Howard Franco, Esq.
15. Fatima Ismail, Consultant.
16. Brian L. Sirota, Esq.
17. Dan Reyes, Consultant.
18. Daniel Schneck, Professor. Virginia Tech.
19. Scott Redman, Esq.
20. Stanley Curbo, Consultant.
21. Chuck Bailey, Esq.
22. Bill Ruskin, Esq.
23. Jeffrey Rollins, Esq.
24. Mary Wolverton, Esq.
25. Bonnie Orden, Esq.
26. Jim Kamanski, Esq.
27. Doug Carner, Expert.
March
29
2012
by Amy Singer, Ph.D. and Diana Greninger
Facebook is changing the look of business pages on March 30, 2012. Is your page ready?
Many law firms are leveraging social media for presentation and trial strategy.
This is the fourth part of a series of articles that will examine each network and give an overview of the tools that are available. This article will summarize what you need to do to have an effective business Facebook page.
Facebook is making a change…what else is new? The best way to keep up with these changes is to embrace them and to have someone on your staff devoted to spending a few hours per week updating your social media profiles. If that is just not possible, you can always hire a company such as Make Me Social, Wix or Black Box Media, among many others, to do that for you.
Hopefully by now you have already seen the changes that are happening to personal profiles. The main thing you may have noticed is the addition of a cover photo. Much like your Twitter page needs a background, your Facebook page needs a cover photo. People love visuals. Look at this as another way to showcase your firm with a demonstrative aid of sorts.
Here are a few things you should take a look at before March 30th:
- Preview: right now, you can log into your business page and click on the “Preview” button to see what your page will look like tomorrow. This gives you a chance to become familiar with it before it goes live for all your fans to see.
- Take a tour: you can also click on the “Admin panel”, click “help” then “take the tour” to learn about every component that is changing.
Remember: change is good. There will be many advantages to this change. You will now be able to post on other walls of any and every other page, not just your own business page. This means your posts will be able to reach a lot more users and increase the number of people in your audience.
If your firm still doesn’t have a Facebook page and you are reading this, you might consider joining the masses and getting your name out there.
Take a look at Trial Consultants, Inc. new Facebook page for some inspiration!
March
21
2012
By Amy Singer, Ph.D. and Diana Greninger
Many law firms are leveraging social media for presentation and trial strategy.
As we continue to mention, there are four key ingredients for running a successful social media campaign: audience gathering, engaging, listening and analyzing. This paper will address the use of secret Facebook groups. This is the third part of a series of articles that will examine each network and give an overview of the tools that are available. This article will summarize how you can use secret Facebook groups to run secret channel focus groups online.
Social media has become the most convenient methods of communication today for one out of every 8 people in the world. There are over 850 million users on Facebook alone! Most people spend an average of 14 hours per month on Facebook.
People log in to Facebook to see what their “friends” are up to, update their “friends” on what they are up to, share stories, brand recommendations and discuss topics of interest, among other things. The key for attorneys is to get involved in people’s discussions about certain topics relating to your cases. Secret Facebook Groups are ideal for small group interactions, much like the ones in deliberation rooms – except you get to be a part of it!
If you read our last article, “Your Guide to a Successful Social Media Campaign Using Facebook,” you know how to gather an audience and engage with them. Now you can do preliminary research on a case by creating a secret focus group. This will allow you to engage in further discussion and pick people’s brains about the specific issues in your case.
Some of the greatest advantages of secret Facebook groups include:
- Secrecy: They are 100% secret. Secret Facebook groups are not indexed by Google. Even if you send someone a URL for the group, they will not be able to see the content unless they have been invited to be a part of your group. Only members of the group will be able to search for and access the group. You can remove members at any time.
- Background information: You can learn more about the people in your secret Facebook group because you will have access to their Facebook profiles.
- Chat: You can create a group chat where members can participate in a real time conversation about a topic.
- Diversity: Members from all over the world can participate at once. This eliminates any issues with transportation, time zones, etc.
- Shared Documents: You can upload documents you want to share with the group so that they can familiarize themselves with the issues of your case prior to starting a discussion.
- Private Photo Sharing: Post photos of your demonstrative evidence to the group that no one else on Facebook can see.
- Worry-free: Only members can see the group and its contents, so you never have to worry about the opposition getting their hands on your insight.
If you are able to create a comfortable environment, you will soon develop a certain rapport with your audience and they will open up and give you their true thoughts and emotions; something real jurors save for deliberations. You will be able to dig deep into specifics.
Managed properly, secret Facebook groups can be an incredible channel to find out what potential jurors will think and feel about the important variables of your case, such as but not limited to: issues, testimony, experts, evidence, and arguments. Once you discover your problem areas, you can test out strategies and tweak your presentation to hit a home run with jurors.
March
14
2012
March 14, 2012
By Amy Singer, Ph.D. and Diana Greninger
Many law firms are leveraging social media for presentation and trial strategy.
As we mentioned last week, there are four key ingredients for running a successful social media campaign: audience gathering, engaging, listening and analyzing. Many traditional social networks can be used. This is the second part of a series of articles that will examine each network and give an overview of the tools that are available. This article will summarize how you can run a successful social media campaign using Facebook.
Audience Gathering
Facebook currently has over 800 million users across the globe. Every single day, users create 100 million “Likes” on Facebook pages. One would think it is easy to get a small fraction of those people to “Like” your page or to participate in discussions about a case. They key is to gather a diverse group of people who will provide insight into a juror’s perspective about your case.
In order to gather an audience, you may want to do some of the following:
- Create a custom Facebook fan page for your case. Do not give any identifying information about you or the parties. People tend to look up specifics and once they know which side is conducting the research, the results are compromised.
- Post interesting articles to your Facebook case page.
- Search for existing groups or pages that discuss legal topics or issues of your case. For example, if your case involves a bicycle, search for forums and groups that discuss all aspects of bicycle riding.
- Join groups where laypersons discuss these issues and areas of interest. For example, helmet safety, bicycle trails, bicycle repair and maintenance, etc.
- Create a presence by participating in conversations and connecting with users
- Dig deeper – Once you connect with people in other groups/pages, look into what other pages they “Like”
Engaging
If you are going to throw a party, you want your guests to have a good time. The same applies to Facebook, there is no point in gathering an audience and having people “Like” your page if you don’t plan on giving them something to talk about. In order to keep people from leaving your party, you must keep them entertained, so that they keep visiting your page. People “Like” things that are essential to their lives or that represent their ideals.
Some ways engage your audience include:
- Comment on people’s posts about ‘mentions’ on other pages
- Make a call to action; invite all your new friends to “Like” your Facebook pages and note which ones they “Like”
- Offer to give charitable donations for a certain number of “Likes”. People like knowing that by simply clicking a button they are contributing to a worthy cause. The charity should relate to your topic. For example, “bikes for Christmas to underprivileged children.”
- Create sweepstakes for a certain number of “Likes”. People love free gifts.
- Most importantly, post interesting articles and information about your litigation issues or anything else that grabs attention and makes sense.
Listening
One of Facebook’s greatest advantages is instant exposure and feedback. Listen to your audience to see which topics they enjoy, which topics they want to learn more about and which topics they ignore. Encourage your audience to ask questions. Let your audience know you are listening by engaging with them and giving them what they ask for.
Analyzing
The best way to analyze the impact of your efforts on Facebook is to use tools that are available. A great number of Twitter tools we discussed in our previous blog post can be used for Facebook as well such as Hootsuite, Socialoomph, SocialBro, Crowdbooster and Klout.
Other tools that are specific for Facebook include: www.allfacebook.com – learn about industry trends and even hire them to do marketing, page customization, advertising and monitoring. Another tool is www.insidefacebook.com – offers news and analysis on Facebook’s growth.
When used daily, Facebook can be an incredible tool to run a successful social media campaign for litigation strategy. The more people “like” your page, the more likely that their “friends” will reach out to you.
The next article will address the use of secret Facebook groups for conducting focus groups.
March
8
2012
March 8, 2012
by Amy Singer, Ph.D. and Diana Greninger
Many law firms are leveraging social media for presentation and trial strategy.
There are four key aspects of running a successful social media campaign: audience gathering, engaging, listening and analyzing. Many traditional social networks can be used. This is first of a series of articles that will examine each network and give an overview of the tools that are available. This article will summarize the tools available for Twitter.
Twiler allows you to find out who is tweeting about your topic. Great for audience gathering.
Tweetstats gives you statistics about your tweets with easy to read graphs. Put in perspective how often you tweet, to whom and when. Great for analytics.
Hootsuite is a dashboard that allows you to schedule your tweets, do keyword geo searches, easy tracking and analytics as well as to monitor multiple accounts in one single place. Great for audience gathering, engaging, listening and analytics.
Socialoomph is very similar to Hootsuite. Allows you to schedule tweets, track keywords, and monitor multiple accounts in one dashboard. For an additional fee you can add auto-follow and auto-DM features. Great for audience gathering, engaging, listening and analytics.
Tweetdeck also similar to Hootsuite, a social media dashboard that allows you to monitor multiple accounts and hashtags at once. Great for audience gathering, engaging, listening and analytics.
Socialbro allows you to schedule tweets, analyze when your followers are online, find out who follows you back and much more. Socialbro can help your tweets be read by the greatest number of followers. Great for engaging, listening and analyzing.
Tweeterfeed allows you to feed your blog entries to twitter and track your statistics. Great tool for engaging your audience by providing them with your best content.
Tweetreach gives insight into your tweets so you can measure the impact of your social media efforts. Search by twitter name, hashtag or phrase. Tweetreach is a great tool for social media mining (listening).
Klout measures how influential you are and gives you a score. Identify which followers are more likely to promote your brand/product/service and connect with them. Great tool for engaging, listening and analytics.
Crowdbooster analyzes your influence, schedule tweets to reach a maximum amount of followers. They also provide recommendations on influential users so you can chose to follow them back and engage with them. This tool is great for audience gathering and engaging.
Tweet grader measures the power of your profile and gives you a score based on number and power of followers, follower-to-following ratio, update frequency and engagement. Allows you to compare your score to the competition. This tool is great for analytics.
Twylah helps your tweets last longer and be seen by more users. Great for audience gathering.
Twiberr a full automation tool that allows you to join groups where you can automatically retweet blogposts as they are published. Great for engaging with little effort.
Twitsprout offers a comprehensive analytics dashboard that is also fun. This tool shows you how your mentions, retweets and followers have changed over time, allowing you to compare how your growth is happening across all metrics. Great tool for analytics.
We suggest you use a combination of the ones you are most comfortable with. When used daily, these tools are able to transform your efforts to a successful social media campaign using Twitter.
March
5
2012
by Janna Anderson, Lee Rainie
Feb 29, 2012
OVERVIEW
Teens and young adults brought up from childhood with a continuous connection to each other and to information will be nimble, quick-acting multitaskers who count on the Internet as their external brain and who approach problems in a different way from their elders, according to a new survey of technology experts.
Many of the experts surveyed by Elon University’s Imagining the Internet Center and the Pew Internet Project said the effects of hyperconnectivity and the always-on lifestyles of young people will be mostly positive between now and 2020. But the experts in this survey also predicted this generation will exhibit a thirst for instant gratification and quick fixes, a loss of patience, and a lack of deep-thinking ability due to what one referred to as “fast-twitch wiring.”
February
6
2012
Facebook or Twitter: What does your choice of social networking site say about you?
February 2, 2012 – by Christian Jarrett
Social l networking sites have changed our lives. There were 500 million active Facebook users in 2011 and approximately 200 million Twitter accounts. As users will know, the sites have important differences. Facebook places more of an emphasis on who you are and who you know. Twitter restricts users to 140-character updates and is more about what you say than who you are. A new study asks whether and how the way people use these sites is related to their personality, and whether there are personalty differences between people who prefer one site over the other.
David Hughes at Manchester Business School and his colleagues surveyed 300 people online – most (70 per cent) were based in Europe, others were from North America, Asia and beyond.