{"id":5140,"date":"2004-11-22T17:31:35","date_gmt":"2004-11-22T21:31:35","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.law.harvard.edu\/formerlyknownas\/2004\/11\/22\/jackal-sequel\/"},"modified":"2011-08-05T14:58:13","modified_gmt":"2011-08-05T18:58:13","slug":"jackal-sequel","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/2004\/11\/22\/jackal-sequel\/","title":{"rendered":"jackal sequel"},"content":{"rendered":"

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

\n

Ross Fishman<\/FONT><\/A> of Red Jackal Ads<\/A><\/EM> has responded to the <\/FONT>questions we raised<\/FONT><\/A> about his services<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
creating glossy-magazine-style Yellow Pages ads for lawyers, in a <\/FONT>Comment<\/FONT><\/A> that deserves to be <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
read in full. ( <\/FONT>Ernie<\/FONT><\/A> touted the “tasteful” ads earlier this month.)  <\/FONT>I’d like to highlight two issues: <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
\"wolf   Ross Fishman says<\/STRONG>:  “[Y]ou comment skeptically that this will inevitably lead to”…<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
higher profits for <\/FONT>some lawyers, without an increase in the quality of legal services”? Well, yes, <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
that’s our goal.  <\/FONT>We’re an ad agency, not Legal Aid; we can’t practice law or control the quality <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
of the legal <\/FONT>services of our clients. Our specific goal is to generate significantly higher profits for <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
some <\/FONT>lawyers — our clients — just as mega-ad agency Leo Burnett’s goal has long been to generate <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
more sales and higher profits for Pillsbury using the Dough Boy. Hey, it’s the American way.”<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n
  <\/FONT> winter nears –
   in the dog’s eyes
   the wolf
<\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/FONT><\/FONT>
\n

                         <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/FONT>Billie Wilson<\/FONT><\/A> <\/FONT><\/P><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n

Your Editor’s Reply<\/STRONG>:   An ad agency may not have a special duty toward the legal client, but lawyers<\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
certainly do.   Consumers can readily tell whether Pillsbury biscuits are worth their premium price<\/FONT>, and lose <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
little giving it a try.   But, the average consumer of legal services cannot readily judge quality or price, which<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
is one reason why clients are given fiduciary protection.  A lawyer’s using PR image-making (and faux empathy)<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
to <\/FONT>create a platform for higher fees, unrelated to the quality of services, does not jibe with my concept of <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
fiduciary responsibility.  Unlike the legal profession, Pillsbury has never claimed to put its customers’ interests first and has never <\/FONT>sworn to do so.  <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
\"tiny  Ross<\/STRONG> notes that Lawyers Weekly<\/EM>, despite its excellent work, may not always “get every single<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
fact correct,” but confirms that “Lorne [MacLean, the ad client in the story] had just spun <\/FONT>off his divorce <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
practice from his partner.”<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n
the wolf too
peeks out his hole…
autumn dusk<\/EM><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
Issa<\/FONT><\/STRONG><\/A>,<\/FONT> translated by D. G. Lanoue<\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
Your Editor’s Reply<\/STRONG>: This still leaves unanswered whether the LW<\/EM> USA<\/EM> <\/FONT><\/FONT>article<\/STRONG><\/FONT><\/A> was correct in stating that <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
MacLean, who had so recently started his own firm, had “increased his firm’s already significant <\/SPAN>profits by <\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
more than 200 percent” and did so “By simply changing the design of his Yellow Pages ad.”  Whether<\/SPAN><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
used by a lawyer or an ad agency, i<\/SPAN>f the quote is misleading, it should not figure so prominently on Red <\/FONT><\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
Jackal’s <\/FONT>website<\/FONT><\/A>.  <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n

\n
    in the dark<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
the trap snaps shut<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
    silent dawn<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
                            <\/FONT><\/FONT>Jim Kacian<\/FONT><\/A> <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
<\/FONT> <\/DIV>
\n
p.s<\/STRONG><\/EM>.  My family name starts with “jackal,” but I’m not sure I’d want that <\/FONT><\/FONT>scavenger-predator<\/FONT><\/A> as <\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
my logo or corporate identity.   The image of the famous movie-character <\/FONT>killer for hire<\/FONT><\/A> doesn’t<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n
inspire me, either.  Guess I’ve gone soft with all this haiku around.<\/FONT><\/DIV>
\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n

\n
 
\n
    \"red<\/FONT><\/DIV><\/DIV><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/BLOCKQUOTE><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Ross Fishman of Red Jackal Ads has responded to the questions we raised about his services creating glossy-magazine-style Yellow Pages ads for lawyers, in a Comment that deserves to be  read in full. ( Ernie touted the “tasteful” ads earlier this month.)  I’d like to highlight two issues:       Ross Fishman says:  “[Y]ou comment skeptically that this will […]<\/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-5140","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-1kU","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5140","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=5140"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5140\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":13505,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/5140\/revisions\/13505"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=5140"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=5140"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/archive.blogs.harvard.edu\/ethicalesq\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=5140"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}