Quantcast
Channel: Will's Blog » marketing
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 3

Disappointing Competitor Conduct

0
0

Preface: The marketing industry for asbestos and similar terms is a very secretive society. There are a number of non-disclosures, waivers and confidentiality agreements that prevent and dissuade people from talking about their experiences.

Over the last year however our industry has come under fire as tort reform and bloggers have launched some rather vitriolic assaults on lawyers and subsequently their marketers. The criticism takes away from our collective professional identity and I think its time for someone to at least stand up and give a response. I think the fact that this is the only serious entry on my personal blog should give an idea of how upset I am.

-------------------------------------------------

Recently an article was published about a deceptive marketing practice used by some of our competitors. The article, written by Roger Parloff, exposed a network of sites that were modeled in such a way that they could confuse visitors into believing they had reach an official VA medical site and not a site aimed at generating leads / cases.

Parloff previously published an article a few years ago about industry practices that had similar tones but the issues raised in that piece were rather mundane compared to this article. When I got a Google Alert mentioning the article I was interested to find out what prompted him to write a second article.

While the sites in the newest article were decidedly about mesothelioma, the screenshots show that the creators referred to the site as the VA Medical Center for a particular area. Many sites in our industry use titles like "information center" or "cancer center" but we know the boundaries and that you can't cross the line and start implying that your site is a legitimate treatment facility much less a VA medical center.

The author contacted the site's sponsors and thankfully someone did get back to him. Christopher Seeger of Steeger Weiss responded to the accusations about the sites by saying he wasn't aware of the problem and that "I don't want my name on a Website that purports to be a government site." Seeger's response is legitimate, often legal marketers and their companies aren't in sync with their clients and that leads to these kinds of situations.

While the sites were later removed I was disappointed that the other firms involved (Flood, Hellbock, SEF) and EJustice, the creator of the sites, did not feel compelled to at least talk to the author and offer their side of the story. It certainly doesn't help our collective professional identity when something like this happens and save for one person, the result is deafening silence.

The asbestos litigation industry is constantly mentioned as the reason we need tort reform in this country and terms like asbestos litigation and asbestos lawyer can have decidedly negative connotations. To make matters worse, over the last year our industry has been harassed by an on again / off again blogger named 'sleazeothelioma' who blogged about what they felt were other deceptive practices.

Mesothelioma, the cancer caused by asbestos exposure, is a horrible and painful disease that I would not wish upon anyone. As a marketer I like to imagine that if I helped someone reach a settlement ... perhaps the little comfort it provides will validate my purpose and the reason why I work for this industry.

But all of that is lost when I see this kind of conduct. It hurts on a personal and professional level because it takes away from my work. Maybe I need a change of scenery?


Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 3

Latest Images

Trending Articles





Latest Images