{"id":4458,"date":"2006-03-27T17:57:14","date_gmt":"2006-03-27T21:57:14","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/formerlyknownas\/2006\/03\/27\/lawyer-ads-the-tension-betwee"},"modified":"2011-08-05T14:54:03","modified_gmt":"2011-08-05T18:54:03","slug":"lawyer-ads-the-tension-between-ethics-and-self-interest","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/2006\/03\/27\/lawyer-ads-the-tension-between-ethics-and-self-interest\/","title":{"rendered":"lawyer ads: the tension between ethics and self-interest"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a><\/p>\n

\n

With the Nevada Bar recently <\/FONT>condemning<\/FONT><\/A> ads by “The Heavy Hitter,<\/EM>” <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
the Supreme Court <\/FONT>refusing<\/FONT><\/A> today to hear a challenge to Florida’s ban <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
on Pape & Chandler’s mild pitbull logo, and the New York bar asking <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
for heavy-handed <\/FONT>restrictions<\/FONT><\/A> on “inappropriate — or even sleazy — <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
advertising” by lawyers, I wanted to share with you an article from 2000, <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
I discovered last weekend. It’s “<\/FONT>Lawyer Advertising and Professional Ethics<\/FONT><\/EM><\/A>,<\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
by Prof. <\/FONT>Jonathan K. Van Patten<\/FONT><\/A>, University of South Dakota School of <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
Law, in Perspectives on the Professions<\/EM>, Vol. 19, No. 2, Spring 2000, <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
sponsored by The Center for the Study of Ethics in the Professions <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
(CSEP<\/FONT><\/A>) at the Illinois Institute of Technology.  <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
                                                                                                     \"podiumS\"<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
The article begins with the text of a typical tv ad.  After noting that it doesn’t<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
in and of itself generate ethical concerns, Prof. Van Patten asks why it <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
nonetheless leaves many with “a sense of unease<\/EM>.”  He then continues:<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n
“Much criticism of lawyer advertising is misplaced. While ostensibly <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
concerned with ethics, it may actually serve other agendas. Attacks <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
on a lawyer’s advertising for personal injury cases, for example, are <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
often attempts to create a predisposition against plaintiffs’ claims in <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
the minds of prospective jurors. There may also be an element of self-<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
righteousness involved. The attacks imply that lawyers who advertise <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
are not good enough to attract clients through the more traditional ways, <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
reputation and word-of-mouth. Criticism of lawyer advertising may also <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
reflect class or social differences (if that term can be used to describe <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
differences in attitude between members of the established bar and <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
neophytes).<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
\"quoteMarksLS\"<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
“Perhaps the best way to express a principled reservation about lawyer <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
advertising is to say that commercialism might have a corrosive effect <\/EM><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
on professionalism<\/EM>. This way of stating the problem, properly understood, <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
does not rest on the outdated image of a legal profession unsullied by the <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
forces of the market. . . .  Rather, this way of stating the problem grounds <\/EM><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
it in the inherent tension between ethics and self-interest<\/EM>. The primary <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
ethical norm relating to clients is that the client’s interests are superior to <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
the lawyer’s. The lawyer’s interests are subordinated, but not lost. The <\/EM><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
creative resolution of the tension honors the client’s interests without losing <\/EM><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
the lawyer’s<\/EM>.”  [emphasis added]<\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
                                                                                                           \"quoteMarksRS\"<\/FONT><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
Prof. Van Patten then discusses the problems inherent in advertising services — <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
in telling and asserting, rather than showing, your worthiness to be trusted.  He <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
stresses that self-restraint and internal values — rather than ethical rules — are what <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
will keep a lawyer focused on serving the client’s interests first.  He explains:<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n
“Restrictions on advertising serve as one of the external restraints on a <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
lawyer’s self-interest. The restrictions are limited in scope, focusing mostly <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
on accuracy. The most important rules, those concerned with dignity, are <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
too hard to write. The restraints supporting dignity must be internal.”<\/FONT><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
More telling is his observation: “For some reason, bankers, doctors, and hospitals <\/EM><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
find it easier to advertise professional services without loss of dignity.<\/EM> Why is loss <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
of dignity more of a problem for lawyers who advertise than for other professionals? <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
The lawyer’s ad cited earlier, with its emphasis on FREE this and FREE that, has <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
more in common with advertising for autos and carpets than with the advertising of <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
other professionals.” <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
\"tightrope<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
Prof. Van Patten then focuses on “the internal struggle” (emphasis added):<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n
“The struggle for professionalism is not simply a matter of ethical lawyers <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
and unethical lawyers. It is a struggle between good and evil that is personal <\/EM><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
to every lawyer<\/EM>. Some lawyers have clearly given in to the dark side; it will <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
take more than a little counseling to bring them back. For them, the bar needs <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
measures sterner than a sermon. For the rest who continue to struggle against <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
the dark side, there is no respite.” . . . <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
                                                                                                  \"SoapBoxDude\"<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
“We come back to the tension curbing the pursuit of self-interest by placing <\/EM><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
the clients’ interests ahead of the lawyer’s. It’s not your case, it’s their case. <\/EM><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
Listen. Think. Meditate.<\/EM> How can I get to where they want to go without losing <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
them, or myself (or even the other side), in the process?<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
“In advertising, this would mean the “soft sell,” not the “hard sell.” Cut out the <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
“FREE” stuff and the other gimmicks. Tell prospective clients who you are, <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
what you do, how you practice, and what you believe in. Then, try living up to <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
those words.”<\/FONT><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
Although I strongly support the right of lawyers to advertise, so long as there is no <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
deception involved, I do have a “sense of unease” when viewing many of their ads.  <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
It is not a matter of the dignity of the profession.  It is more the feeling that most <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
(certainly not all) lawyers advertising on television have their personal financial inter-<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
ests <\/FONT>in mind far <\/FONT>more than service to their clients.  Their primary<\/EM> goal is to get very <\/EM><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
rich (through sheer numbers of clients and through rolling the dice in the great law-<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
suit lottery game), rather than <\/FONT>to use their professional expertise and their dedication <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
to help clients <\/FONT>with legal <\/FONT>problems.   <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
\"SoapBoxDudeF\"<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
As soon as your primary motive is to make a killing with your legal license, <\/FONT>rather <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
than making a good living serving your clients, it becomes far too easy to start <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
cutting ethical corners and ignoring <\/FONT>ethical blindspots.  For those who are not <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
already lost to the darkside, it is indeed a constant struggle to stay vigilant and <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
ethical.<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n

\n

\n
\"tiny Time out for a few haiku and senryu from former <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
lawyer, and chronic sports fan, <\/FONT>Barry George<\/FONT><\/A>: <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n

\n

\n
my nephew’s fastball –<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
I hand back his glove<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
and keep the sting   <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT><\/DIV><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n

\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
\"infielderS\"<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n

\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
lost in thought — 
the track announcer’s voice
drifts over the river <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV><\/DIV>
\n

\n

\n

\n
<\/FONT><\/DIV>passing the beggar —
my pockets start
to jingle<\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n

\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
the kite’s pull —<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
in another life I wore <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
a braided pigtail <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n

\n

\n
barry george<\/STRONG><\/FONT><\/A><\/DIV>
\n
“<\/FONT>passing the beggar<\/FONT><\/A>” Simply Haiku<\/EM> (Spring 2005)<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
“<\/FONT>the kite’s pull<\/FONT><\/A>” The Heron’s Nest<\/EM> (July 2002)<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
“my nephew’s fastball” –  bottle rockets<\/EM> #11<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
“<\/FONT>lost in thought<\/FONT><\/A>” – from the heron’s nest <\/FONT><\/A><\/EM><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
 <\/DIV>
\n
                                                                                                                \"kiteN\"<\/FONT><\/EM><\/DIV>
\n
                       <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

With the Nevada Bar recently condemning ads by “The Heavy Hitter,” the Supreme Court refusing today to hear a challenge to Florida’s ban on Pape & Chandler’s mild pitbull logo, and the New York bar asking for heavy-handed restrictions on “inappropriate — or even sleazy — advertising” by lawyers, I wanted to share with you an article from 2000, I discovered last […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":94,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":false,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2},"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[2926],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-4458","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-pre-06-2006"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p6kP1R-19U","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4458","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/94"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=4458"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4458\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":12713,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4458\/revisions\/12713"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=4458"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=4458"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=4458"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}