7 Things I have learnt about PR and the Law

Clipart Source: Microsoft Office

Copyright. Defamation. Contracts. Patents. Restrictive Trade Practices. Litigation. Cyberlaw.

It has been almost a month of blogging, a month of reading, a month of trying to discover the PR practioner in me, a month of learning all along… A full circle. Time for me to consolidate my ‘bloggings’ on PR and the Law.

Clipart Source: Microsoft Office

1. PR and Law was too broad a topic to explore in a blog. It was a challenge to keep each blog short, readable and as comprehensive as possible. I feel that I did not do enough justice to 3 posts in particular: Litigation PR, and the posts on online copyright and defamation.

2. There are no easy answers to any of the issues addressed in my various posts on copyright, patents, defamation, restrictive trade practices, and litigation. Every post only kindled a debate and the desire to read more and (re) search more…

3. PR campaigns have been at the forefront in battles fought over Intellectual Property Rights on both sides. A case of PR vs. PR !

4. While I did come across books on Litigation PR (only 2), I did not find a single book that looked at PR and the Law as a whole. I found this to be quite a frustrating experience. Did I not look hard enough?

5. There are hundreds of e-resources available on the topics that I have covered in the blog, too many to even mention here. To use a cliched expression, the Internet is a veritable mine of information on this topic. Reader’s discretion is advised!

6. About 60% of the all the information that I came across in my (re) search into this topic, was on Litigation PR. This in itself shows how popular this branch of PR is and how much scope it has.

7. Love it or hate it, PR is here to stay. No matter how many reams are written about the not so palatable parts of PR, it is a fact that PR cannot be done away with. Call it by any name — networking, marketing, advertising — it is still PR!

Endnote: I think I may have found a topic for my dissertation. 

The New Debate?

Who should head the Communications Department of a company?

With the increase in legal work for PR professionals and in PR work for legal professionals, I pose a question which can have implications for the future of PR in an increasingly legal environment

Who should the CEO of a company choose to head the all-important communications function? Should it be a lawyer or a PR professional?

Let me confess here that my question is hardly original (though the presentation definitely is!). I first read about this debate in the The Public Relations Stategist in an article by F.W. Wiley and B.M. Epstein (1995).

They have stated that many Fortune 500 companies like General Motors have their communications departments run by lawyers and that this is ‘a matter of increasing concern’ to PR professionals.

While the PR professional is trained to take the widest possible view-point and communicate with the stakeholders accordingly, lawyers are the legal experts. A win-win best situation would be one where the PR person would be trained in law or a lawyer who has had training in PR.

I feel that at the level of heading the communications department of a company, it is important for that person to have legal knowledge. But more important is communication skills, because effective communication is the basis of all communication and that is what good PR is all about.

What do you think?

Endnote: Whatever the outcome of the above discussion, PR and PR professionals have a bright future in the current litigous environment we live in.

Lawyers use PR too!

Image Source: www.sxc.hu

I have a lawyer friend. Her name is Sharmila and she is currently in London to do her LLM.

Whenever we meet we always talk about food! Until recently, that is.

Yesterday afternoon, after a nice lunch, we got around to talking about assignments — our next favourite topic of discussion — and by default this blog. When I told her about the blog topic, she said something that surprised me for its sheer candidness.

You’re doing a blog on PR and the Law? You should have done your blog on Lawyers and PR. That would have been more appropriate as lawyers and law firms need PR.

I asked her to elaborate and this is what she had to say. In India, lawyers cannot advertise their services. So they depend entirely on PR for their business and clientele.

 In fact, to quote Sharmila, lawyers do a lot of ‘PR ing’. This is mainly achieved through:

•    Networking through local clubs, and conferences & seminars organised by national and international bar associations.

•   Word of mouth wherein a grateful client will recommend his/her lawyer to other people who may need legal services.

•   Contributing to newspaper columns by offering legal advice on topics such as infrastructure, nationality & emigration, and finance.

•   Appearing on the TV, though this is a fairly recent trend.

•   Using blogs to reach out to younger, potential clients. Indian Lawyer is one such blog.

•   Big law firms look to recruit lawyers who can bring in high profile clients. If these lawyers come from ‘well-known’ families, it is like a bonus recruitment!

The latest trend in India is for law firms to hire PR agencies for effective communication strategies and its implementation.

Well! This was a very interesting  piece of information for me and it spurred me to (re)search for more information on this issue in the UK.

In the UK, there have been a series of reforms pertaining to the legal profession with the Legal Services Act 2007 having implications for the PR profession. The Legal Services Act 2007 has brought in the opportunity for solicitors to ‘team up with non-lawyers and to attract capital for their businesses in a carefully regulated environment’ (Solicitors Regulation Authority).

There are many PR agencies who offer legal PR (as opposed to litigation PR). For example, MConsulting and Kelso PR. Needless to say, there is a lot of scope for PR work to flourish in this sector.

Endnote: In the US, lawyers are allowed to advertise, which opens up an entirely new angle to a discussion on PR and the Law. I came across a US lawyer’s blog titled ‘Real Lawyers Have Blog’. It makes for interesting reading.

Litigation PR

The Royal Courts of Justice, popularly known as the Old Bailey, in London is a beautiful old building. Tom, a lawyer and a guide for London Walks, told me that since photography was not permitted inside the Old Bailey, it was common practice for TV crews to report cases against its backdrop.

I have decided to do the same with my post on Litigation PR (henceforth known as LPR)!

The Old Bailey

In court cases, plaintiffs and defendents are warned by judges not to influence the ultimate verdict outside the courtroom.

Even 20 years back, I believe that this would have been possible. But in today’s times of the media reporting ‘happenings’ even before they happen? Forget it.

This is where LPR comes in. It is believed that publicity has the potential of influencing public opinion and that is a powerful tool for any lawyer, plaintiff, or defendant.

LPR encompasses the behind-the-scenes communications support needed by the legal team to win their case, not just in the court of law, but also in the court of public opinion. 

A victory in the court of public opinion engineered by LPR sometimes has more impact than the actual courtroom verdict.

One just has to recall the cases of OJ Simpson and former US President Bill Clinton’s ‘Monicagate’. Both scored significant wins in the courts of public opinion after initial scepticism.

Though the ethics of LPR is hotly debated (‘Litigation Public Relations: Problems and Limits’, by D.C. Gibson and M.E. Padilla), lawyers have realised that LPR provides their clients with many advantages.

2006, Praeger Publishers, pp.204

This is the reason law firms get LPR tactics in motion even before a possible lawsuit; these tactics could continue even after the verdict is announced.

With the importance of LPR being acknowledged and the amount of media coverage that lawsuits get, it is not surprising that PR professionals are attracted to this niche area.

PR agencies are now offering specialised LPR services. Some of PR agencies which offer LPR in the UK are Kysen PR, Bell Yard, and Byfield Consultancy.

I recommend to you this interview on litigation comunication and media relations. Do listen to it.

I also came across a book (featured right) during my (re)search on this topic. Need I say anything more about LPR?

Endnote: While PR firms are offering specialised LPR services, the same is not reflected in PR education or  training in universities. A random survey of the PR courses taught in Universities in the UK and the US have revealed that none of them offer LPR as a separate module. Will this change in the future?