What’s killing me about  Susan Cartier Liebel’s latest “tip of the week” is that she’s absolutely right.  Susan borrows from Paramjit Mahli over at Profiting With Public Relations to urge lawyers to consider the public relations value of sending letters to the editor. 

I am a huge fan of letters to the editor.  They present ideas that the op-ed writers, far too brilliant in their own agendas, often miss.  At the very least, they reflect the trend of public opinion, often showing that the public disagrees with the institutional views adopted in editorials and articles.  If the letters section wasn’t there, one would never know how ideas play out in the forum of public opinion.  We would be limited to the medias perspective, which may not reflect the public’s issues and concerns.  I truly appreciate hearing a broader wealth of views than those whose opinions are bought and paid for by the publisher.

Given my appreciation of the letters, Susan’s point cut me to the quick.  It’s bad enough in the blawgosphere that so many so-called blogs are popping up for no better reason than to pump one lawyer or another.  So many blogs, so little content.  Give me thought or go away.  I may not agree, but at least it makes me think.

But the letters, pristine and honest.  A truthful and accurate reflection of the voice of the people.  Unless, of course, it becomes yet another dumping ground for people who want to get their name in the paper for untoward purposes.

Should the letters to the editor become the latest, greatest craze in self-promotion?  My knee-jerk reaction is, PLEASE NO! PLEASE DON’T DO IT! PUUUUHHHLEEEEEAAASSSSEEEE!

But then, I’m a dinosaur (as has been roundly acknowledged by all who know me) and I’m generally the last in line to recognize a trend, except as to lawyerly fashion where I remain cutting edge.  Given the lack of opportunity for lawyers to say or do something to show to the world (or at least the universe of potential clients) that they know what they’re doing and are worthy of the public trust, why not speak their mind publicly? 

I certainly (and obviously) believe that lawyers are every bit as entitled to express their personal views as anyone else in society.  Indeed, our perspective often adds greatly to the discourse and dissemination of ideas.  We see and live things that others don’t, and our education, training and experience allows us to consider consequences of action much farther down the road than many other people.  Perhaps our lack of expressing views has been a contributing factor to many poor political decisions.

Why do we keep our ideas to ourselves?  My guess is that the biggest factor is fear that the expression of views may drive away potential clients who disagree.  A commitment to a point of view scares people who depend upon a broad array of people to use their services.  No one can maintain a law practice while driving clients away in droves. 

If this is true, then writing letters to the editor may prove a dangerous thing for those seeking to get a little free press out of it.  Unless they espouse views of such utter inoffensiveness that no one will be scared off, the plan could backfire on them.  But if the letters say nothing, then no one will publish them.  After all, newspapers get plenty of letters and have room for very few.  They have to pick and choose the ones that will interest readers, rather than the ones that make the writers happy because their name is attached.

So after some calm, deliberate thought, Susan’s idea offers greater promise of public benefit than first appeared from its flagrantly self-serving purpose.  Lawyers, write as many letters as you want.  If your letters do nothing beyond promoting yourself, they will find their way into the circular file where they belong.  The newspaper isn’t there to give you free advertising on the letters page.  Either your letters cut the mustard, or they get tossed.

As for clogging the works with an avalanche of self-promotional letters, I doubt that will end up being a problem.  Writing letters takes more work than most self-promoters want to do, and that immediately cuts down significantly on volume.  People write when they care.  Self-promotion just isn’t a strong enough motivator.  Moreover, those who do submit letters, but find that nobody has the slightest interest in their letters, are going to quit trying very soon.  When the return on the investment of effort is too small, they will drop like flies.

If the letters are found to be worthy of publication, then you’ve done something to contribute to the public discourse, whether its added some facts, brought a different perspective or caught some lame-brained editorial in flagranti delicto.  If you can slide your letter past the vetting process, you’ve earned the right to be published.  And if you’ve earned the right to be published, then you deserve whatever degree of self-promotion comes with it.

While I tend to be the wet blanket on all those blogs that hype lawyer marketing, much to Susan’s chagrin, she’s turned me around on this one.  The only advice I can add is that if your letter says nothing, somebody is bound to notice.  If your letter is foolish and somehow manages to get in the paper, then your killing your own credibility.  So write letters as often as you like, but use them as tools to build your credibility and worthiness by proving that you have something substantive to add to the conversation.  If you do this, get published and gain widespread fame and fortune, I salute you.  You’ve earned it.