Some people find this Youtube video of a mock-plaintive junior at PR agency Ten Yetis amusing. Maybe it did the trick but it left me feeling a little embarrassed for her. If I was her client, I’d be wondering if that’s all there is to pitching journalists – and wondering if I didn’t need a little more marketing savvy injecting into my PR efforts.

Why, for example, was there not one single good reason offered up to the journalist to write about the product in that video? Why do readers need to know about it, why is it better than similar apps? It’s not like there wasn’t enough time – she had plenty to plug the product name (three times I counted). Maybe it’s a pile of crap and maybe that’s why, as a pitch attempt, this PR flack’s effort was pretty lame. Just my view of course, based on the information available at the time of writing. Am I right or am I being too harsh?

Note: a couple of days after writing this post, I was directed via a Twitter follower to this blog entry about other ‘quality’ output from Ten Yetis PR. And today, a very experienced trade magazine editor read my post and told me “they do the kind of PR that makes you want to kill out their emails before you even read them.”

Some would say lawyers deserve all they get reputation-wise: they communicate in a strange, obscure language, deliberately designed to complicate the simple; they inhabit a rarefied, archaic world largely untouched by modern business norms such as offering high customer service levels and value for money. I suspect Luke Johnson’s recent damning column in The Financial Times speaks for many. The British government clearly thinks things need shaking up too because its ‘Legal Services Act’ comes into force next year, and aims to open up and deregulate the market. It has been described by The Times newspaper as the legal sector’s own version of The City’s ‘Big Bang’.

This polar bear ‘brief’ in Vancouver is probably the world’s only cool lawyer. Credit: photo courtesy Claire Dancer, Flickr

If, as expected, it creates greater competition, in-flows of capital and outside management, will these factors drive a big improvement in the way British Law firms market themselves? I think it will, and it’s long overdue according to James Baxter*:

“The legal sector remains on the whole undifferentiated: the same lawyers, offering the same services to the same clients who have little idea what distinguishes the amorphous mass of firms before them.”

Baxter ought to know. He is a former editor of Legal Business magazine. For those firms who’ve not yet taken the plunge into marketing, here’s one simple, important and overriding rule:  never entrust the task to any of the partners, unless they can demonstrate genuine, business and brand-building experience. This is what happens when you break that rule. Last month I received an alert saying my Twitter stream @andymturner was being followed by no less than ‘London’s coolest law firm’. How do I know this apparently oxymoronic claim is for real? Because that’s how the firm’s founder and senior partner trumpets his firm’s Twitter account biography. Somewhat surprised, I clicked through to the firm’s website expecting to see the epitome of cool, but of course, found just another dull-looking law firm with an equally ordinary client list. So I couldn’t resist writing to tell said senior partner that it’s unlikely anyone wants ‘cool’ from their law firm and to find a better USP fast before anyone important sees it, or at least just drop it. He replied with what seemed a little ‘froideur’ saying that he probably will, that he didn’t take Twitter seriously anyway (which is evident because he’s following 8,000+ people) and that it’s better to be talked about than not at all. I took the trouble to reply but haven’t heard from him again. Some people are so damned ungrateful on receipt of free, sensible advice.