When I learned that I was used in a post at the  Lawyerist by some SEO marketer, I was less than flattered.  It’s not just the fact that I think the Lawyerist is just about the most insipid website for lawyers around (it is), devoid of substance and catering to readers who have difficulty counting to 21 with their pants on. It’s that I don’t care to be used as somebody’s fluff.

Aaron Street, boy-wonder of the Lawyerist,  came back at me on twitter with his challenge:

@ScottGreenfield Well-reasoned analysis as always.

For some, twitter is a perfectly acceptable medium to express a well-reasoned analysis, fully capable of handling their deepest thoughts in 140 characters, with room left for a hashtag.  Not so for me, so I promised Aaron I would explain further.  It’s the least I can do.

The post, entitled Providing Excellent Client Service, comes from the hand of Gyi Tsakalakis.  Remember Gyi?  Neither did I, so I took a look,  Here’s how he describes himself: “Hire me at AttorneySync.”  That’s right, he’s an SEO marketer, clearly the first person one would turn to for excellence in client service.

So what would an SEO marketer have to offer?  Nothing, of course.  So instead of writing a post on something about which the author has the slightest knowledge, he does a cut and past of other people’s words:

So what is excellent client service and how do you provide it? Here are some thoughts from people that know what they’re talking about:

Are you with me so far?  Some SEO marketers wants to promote himself, crying “hire me,” by posting on a shitblog about things he knows nothing about by cutting and pasting comments by others who know what they’re talking about.

He then follows with quotes from Pat Lamb, Dan Hull,  Carolyn Elefant, all lawyers who have made excellent client service a hallmark of their practice. And me. Oh, and some marketer gal I’ve never heard of.

One might get the impression that this was an interview, where Tsakalakis did the question thing and got important answers.  But it’s not. No interview happened. No questions asked and answered. Nothing.  What he did was grab a quote from some old blog post, paste it into his own and pass it off as advice.  Worse still, the cuts were of fluffiness without the substance that comprised the original writings, the sort of easily digestible yet meaningless stuff, reflecting none of the thought that went into the originals. 

Each of the people quoted, except the gal I’ve never heard of, have written some significant things about client service.  But that’s not what found its way into this post.  It’s almost as if Tsakalakis said to himself, “let’s take the empty rhetoric and leave the substance, so nobody gets a headache reading this because they have to think too hard.”

One might also get the impression that the quoted lawyers endorsed the post, or perhaps Tsakalakis, by allowing their names and words to fill the empty void where a post was promised.  I can’t speak for anyone else, but nobody asked me if I wanted some SEO marketer I’ve never heard of taking my quote and using it in lieu of any actual thought on his part.

It’s not that it’s a copyright violation, as its just a quote and it survives fair use.  It’s that it’s empty, and it makes the people who have something worthwhile to say appear to be part of its emptiness.  Where a blog post could be an expression of thought, this is manifest laziness and worthlessness, 37 seconds of copying to create something that is less than the sum of its parts.

When I learned that this SEO marketer had used me for his post, it was by email making fun of me for participating in such a sham.  I protested that I had nothing to do with it, that I didn’t endorse it and that it bore no resemblance to anything that any moderately thoughtful person would do.

Which is what makes it a perfect post for the Lawyerist, purveyor of twinkies to lawyers.  I hope, Aaron, this suffices as a well-reasoned analysis, even if it took me more than 140 characters to spell it out.  Any other questions?