Journal - Legal Professionaism On Tiktok and Youtube

Lawfluencers: Legal Professionalism on TikTok and YouTube
ANTHONY SONG *
JUSTINE ROGERS †
ABSTRACT
This article investigates the rise of lawyer-influencers or ‘lawfluencers’ and what their arrival means
for legal professionalism. In today’s attention economy, ‘influencers’ are now central players. An
influencer shares knowledge and ‘lifestyle’ on social media to accumulate a ‘following’ whose loyalty
they ‘monetise’ for commercial gain and/or cultural capital. They do so through performance
strategies, usually by curating an ‘amateur’ (charismatic and relatable) identity. Lawfluencers are part
of a rising crop of – underexamined – ‘knowledge influencers’; professionals who are sharing their
expertise and daily lives with global audiences. To be successful, lawfluencers must choose which
balance between professional (trusted expert with certain duties and values) and amateur (authentic
and approachable personalities) best suits their ‘brand’ and audience. This public engagement and
exposure is unprecedented for a profession that has historically opposed advertising and maintained a
certain mystique. Our article explains what lawfluencing is, focusing on TikTok and YouTube as the
two most prominent video-based social media platforms. It identifies the drivers behind and
technological features shaping the appearance of influencing in law. It also describes the types of videos
lawyers are creating, and with what blends of professional versus amateur. Our article focuses on the
implications of ‘lawfluencing’ for ‘professionalism’ or for the identities, expertise, values, and
arrangements that have typically marked out professional status. Lawfluencing might be offering
greater access to justice for the public, and new outlets for creativity and career progression for
lawyers, but this activity is occurring on the platforms of Big Tech, subject to their commercial
imperatives and the sovereignty of the algorithm. This article outlines the ethics risks influencing poses
to clients and lawyers, and the possible challenges to the legitimacy of the legal profession and the
legal system. In the process, we identify responsible lawfluencing practices necessary for the
sustainable development of the legal profession in the digital era.
*
Research Fellow, Centre for the Future of the Legal Profession, Faculty of Law & Justice, UNSW, Sydney.
†
Associate Professor, Faculty of Law & Justice, UNSW, Sydney.
This article will be published in Volume XXXVII of the Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics. This version and
the data contained within is current as of 1 May 2023 and may change upon final publication.
Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4470377

TABLE OF CONTENTS
I Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 3
II Definitions, Forms & Drivers ............................................................................................. 6
A What is ‘lawfluencing’? .................................................................................................. 6
B What are Lawfluencers doing? What types of videos and other products are they
making? .................................................................................................................................. 9
C What is driving the advent of Lawfluencers and shaping their activities? ................... 12
III Implications For Professionalism ................................................................................. 15
A Access to Justice and a Lawyer’s Other Public Interest Values ................................... 15
B The Lawyer-Client Relationship, Fiduciary Obligations, and Customised Care.......... 19
C Lawyers’ Autonomy and Wellbeing, the Legal Profession, and the Administration of
Justice................................................................................................................................... 21
IV Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 24

I INTRODUCTION
A man, wearing a glittering green tuxedo and a purple and yellow floral tie, dances to the
camera, lip-syncing a Taylor Swift song. Raising his hands to the camera to show off chunky
diamond rings, he twirls, steps back, then waves goodbye to the viewer. At 12-seconds long,
this video was posted by U.S. lawyer Kevin Kennedy, on his TikTok page (@kennedylawfirm).
On the post are the hashtags: #kevsgotyoucovered #lawyer #dance #bejeweled #shimmer
#glitter #taylorswift #fyp #foryou. 1 This video attracted 30,900 ‘likes’ and 461 comments on
TikTok, the social media platform that allows users to create and share short-form (15 second
to 10 minute) videos. 2
Kennedy is known 3 for resembling the slick, fictional lawyer, Saul Goodman, of American
crime drama, Better Call Saul—a persona Kennedy has embraced as part of his self-
presentation online. 4 In the video just described, by singing a Taylor Swift song, Kennedy is
referencing a then-recent event in which Ticketmaster’s website crashed due to overwhelming
demand for Swift’s concert tickets. Fans vented their frustration on social media, and joined
lawsuits against the ticket sales company. 5
Elsewhere across cyberspace, Leeja Miller, a legal content creator, begins a livestream (video
occurring in real time) on her YouTube channel, ‘Leeja Live’. Titled, ‘Lawyer Reacts to Taylor
Swift/Ticketmaster Drama’, Miller provides her legal opinion on the case and responds directly
to the live comments and questions rolling in from viewers. 6 Miller does not give any verbal
or written disclaimers in the video about whether what she is saying amounts to legal advice.
The only disclaimer appears at the very bottom of the video description, which, to see, requires
the viewer to click the button, ‘Show more’. Above the disclaimer are affiliate links (weblinks
that earn a commission) to various products, including makeup, filming equipment, and hair
products. Miller’s video is one among many on YouTube in which lawyers shared their
reactions to the event. 7
1
A hashtag is a word or phrase preceded by a # symbol used on social media to categorise messages to specific
topics. #fyp is an acronym popularised by TikTok meaning ‘For You Page’, referring to the frontpage of TikTok
that is filled with recommended content and videos. Creators use this hashtag to try and get their video on other
users For You Page to increase views and visibility.
2
As at time of writing on 20 April 2023.
3
Stephanie Harper, Kevin Kennedy’s Law Firm TikTok Page Is Reminding People of ‘Better Call Saul’,
DISTRACTIFY, https://www.distractify.com/p/kennedy-law-firm-tiktok (last visited Sep. 25, 2022); Kev Kennedy
/ Kennedy Law Firm, KNOW YOUR MEME, https://knowyourmeme.com/memes/people/kev-kennedy-kennedy-
law-firm (last visited May 1, 2023).
4
Saul Goodman is a fictional character from the television series ‘Breaking Bad’ and its prequel spin-off ‘Better
Call Saul. Saul’s character is known for his charisma, flamboyant personality, sarcastic wit and morally
ambiguous nature.
5
Peter Cohan, Swifties’ Suit Seeks $2,500 Per Ticketmaster Antitrust Violation, FORBES (06/12/22),
https://www.forbes.com/sites/petercohan/2022/12/06/swifties-suit-seeks-2500-per-ticketmaster-antitrust-
violation/.
6
Leeja Live, Lawyer Reacts to Taylor Swift/Ticketmaster Drama, YOUTUBE,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oknIVf1Vw2U (last visited Dec. 9, 2022).
7
The Hollywood Attorney, Lawyer REACTS to Ticketmaster and Taylor Swift Drama, YOUTUBE,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRGgzpJvqP0 (last visited Dec. 9, 2022); LegalBytes, Why the Taylor Swift
Ticketmaster Case Won’t Go Far, YOUTUBE, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgYzEYMGuXo (last visited
Dec. 9, 2022); Top Music Attorney, Lawyer Reacts to Taylor Swift Ticketmaster DRAMA, YOUTUBE,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X8QwlBvQsJI (last visited Dec. 12, 2022).

These are depictions of ‘lawfluencers’ (or lawyer influencers) 8 – lawyers using their legal
knowledge and identity (both personal and professional) for the production and sharing of
video ‘content’ online. An influencer’s aim is to accumulate a ‘following’ to then ‘influence’
its behaviour, primarily as potential consumers; and to otherwise ‘monetise’ their social media
presence for ‘commercial gain and/or cultural capital’. 9 Today, lawyers across practices of all
sizes are sharing legal information, analysis and advice, and/or providing entertainment to
global audiences, sometimes in the millions. As a result, they are constructing public personas
and brands, carving out so-called ‘niches’ as sources of legal authority and entertainment,
attracting new clients and building communities —and, in many instances, making
considerable amounts of money.
This activity is new territory for the law, which has long had an aversion to and prohibition on
advertising of any kind. 10 Traditionally, lawyers gained work through word-of-mouth referrals
and, on a larger, institutional scale, through the symbols, self-regulatory authority, and
monopoly protections supporting professional status. However, as the two opening examples
illustrate and as detailed in this article, much has changed in recent decades; and there are now
clear-cut regulatory, business, and technological affordances of this move to lawyers using and
making money out of video-based social media platforms. There are also distinct social,
economic, political, and again, technological forces shaping how this activity is then rolling
out.
Our article considers the meanings of this new type of endeavour in legal practice, focusing on
the currently leading, video-based social media platforms: YouTube 11 and TikTok. 12 Lawyers’
use of social media has attracted scholarly attention. 13 However, outside a few short,
professional pieces, 14 comparatively little is known about ‘lawfluencing’ and the particular
workings of video platforms in the legal context. Video social media is different from text-
8
Other related popular terminology, specific to certain platforms, include LawTok or LawTube.
9
Susie Khamis et al., Self-Branding, ‘Micro-Celebrity’ and the Rise of Social Media Influencers, 8 CELEBRITY
STUDIES 191, 191 (Routledge Mar. 2017); Alison Hearn & Stephanie Schoenhoff, From Celebrity to Influencer:
Tracing the Diffusion of Celebrity Value across the Data Stream, in A COMPANION TO CELEBRITY 194 (John
Wiley & Sons, Ltd 2015).
10
James B. Reed, Advertising and the Legal Profession, 28 DICTA 101 (1951).
11
YouTube is a leading video-sharing and social media platform. After being acquired by Google in 2006, it is
currently the second most visited website in the world with over 2.514 billion active users. YouTube Statistics and
Trends, DATAREPORTAL, https://datareportal.com/essential-youtube-stats (last visited Apr. 21, 2023).
12
TikTok is rapidly growing short-form video sharing social media that was founded in September 2016 by
Chinese start-up ByteDance originally under the name Douyin. In August 2018 the app launched internationally
as TikTok. In September 2021, TikTok announced it had 1 billion global monthly active users: TikTok Statistics
and Trends, DATAREPORTAL, https://datareportal.com/essential-tiktok-stats (last visited Apr. 21, 2023).
13
Jan L. Jacobowitz, Lawyers Beware: You Are What You Post - The Case for Integrating Cultural Competence,
Legal Ethics, and Social Media, 17 SMU SCI. & TECH. L. REV. 541 (2014); Alyce Zawacki, Social Media Use in
the Legal Profession, 43 ALTERNATIVE L.J. No. 2, 120 (2018); Katherine Taken Smith & L. Murphy Smith, Social
Media Usage by Law Firms: Correlation to Revenue, Reputation, and Practice Areas, 40 SERVICES MARKETING
QUARTERLY 66 (Routledge Feb. 2019); Francine Ryan, The Use and Practice of Social Media, in DIGITAL
LAWYERING (Routledge 2021).
14
Sharon D. Nelson & John W. Simek, Common Ethical Pitfalls of Digital Marketing, 31 GPSOLO 74 (2014);
Dustin Sanchez, Social Media and Online Marketing for Lawyers (Aka Video Domination), 35 GPSOLO 16 (2018);
Allison Shields Johs, ABA TechReport 2021 Websites & Marketing, AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION,
https://www.americanbar.org/groups/law_practice/publications/techreport/2021/webmarketing/ (last visited Jul.
1, 2022).

based or image-based social media because of its real-time, audio-visual format. By design,
this technology is interactive – and highly appealing; U.S. lawfluencer, Michael Mandell
(@lawbymike), for instance, attracted 3.5 million ‘followers’ on TikTok within seven weeks. 15
Moreover, as a form of ‘knowledge influencing’ in which the influencer is sharing expertise
more than lifestyle to build a brand, lawfluencing is intriguing. 16 Traditionally, successful
influencers strategically portrayed themselves as having a relatable identity as amateur or non-
expert. 17 But, influencers today, especially knowledge influencers, must choose which balance
between amateur (trusted peer, ‘of the people’) and professional (trusted expert with certain
duties and values) best suits their ‘brand’ and audience. 18
Our article examines the nature of lawfluencing and its implications for ‘professionalism’ or
for the types of identities, expertise, relationships, values, and institutional arrangements that
have typically marked out professional status. 19 Could we see the advent of legal video
marketing, for example, as a welcome adaptation of the profession’s traditional public service
and access to justice commitments? Could we also see it as a way in which lawyers can
themselves reclaim work autonomy, wellbeing, and satisfaction against workplace pressures
and controls? Or is lawfluencing simply another way in which the law and the legal identity
are becoming more commercialised, diluted, and non-exclusive, and in this instance at the
behest of the giant technology platforms? In what ways does lawfluencing pose significant and
novel risks to the law’s basis for trust and legitimacy? In addressing these questions, this article
contributes, then, to ongoing, wider discussions about the changing nature of the law and legal
practice 20 in these new circumstances in which the digital cultures and business models of the
technology platforms are commanding.
Our article is structured as follows. Part II explains what lawfluencing or legal video marketing
is within the wider contexts of ‘influencing’ and digital marketing. It describes the types of
videos lawyers are creating and sharing, and with what blends of professional versus amateur
and what levels of success. It also pinpoints the main drivers behind its uptake in law. In the
process, Part II also clarifies some of the technological features of the video social media
platforms that explain how they work and why they present certain opportunities and risks for
lawyers and the public. Part III considers the implications of lawyers’ use of social media video
platforms: on professional values and identity, relationships to the client and public, and the
status of the legal profession and legal system more broadly. Part V concludes and suggests
avenues for future research.
15
Jacob Sapochnick, 11 Lawyers Going Viral on TikTok Right Now, ENCHANTING LAWYER (Mar. 23, 2020),
https://www.enchantinglawyer.com/10-lawyers-going-viral-on-tiktok-right-now/.
16
Jessica Maddox, Micro-Celebrities of Information: Mapping Calibrated Expertise and Knowledge Influencers
among Social Media Veterinarians, 0 INFORMATION, COMMUNICATION & SOCIETY 1 (Routledge Aug. 2022).
17
Crystal Abidin, #familygoals: Family Influencers, Calibrated Amateurism, and Justifying Young Digital Labor,
3 SOCIAL MEDIA + SOCIETY 2056305117707191, 201 (SAGE Publications Ltd Jan. 2017).
18
Maddox, supra note 18, at 7.
19
Mirko Noordegraaf, Hybrid Professionalism and beyond: (New) Forms of Public Professionalism in Changing
Organizational and Societal Contexts, 2 JOURNAL OF PROFESSIONS AND ORGANIZATION 187 (Jan. 2015).
20
For international examples on ‘continuity and change’, see LAWYERS IN 21ST-CENTURY SOCIETIES VOL. 1:
NATIONAL REPORTS (Richard L. Abel et al. eds., Bloomsbury Publishing 2020); LAWYERS IN 21ST-CENTURY
SOCIETIES VOL. 2: COMPARISONS AND THEORIES (Richard L. Abel et al. eds., Bloomsbury Publishing 2020).

II DEFINITIONS, FORMS & DRIVERS
In this Part, we define lawfluencing, describe the sorts of ‘content’ lawyers are marking, and
the forces that are both enabling these activities as well as heavily shaping what they look like.
A What is ‘lawfluencing’?
Increasingly, influencing via video platforms is being pursued by individual lawyers in their
professional roles for self-branding, self-promotion, creative purposes, and/or on behalf of their
firms for the organisation’s branding and advertising. 21 Influencing is the activity of sharing
lifestyles or knowledge on digital channels to accumulate a large ‘following’ 22 or network over
which one has influence or persuasive power. 23 Influencing is a branch of digital marketing,
which is, broadly, the use of online technologies to acquire customers, build customer
preferences, promote brands, retain customers and increase sales. 24 But influencing also has
elements of sociality, community, and performance that makes it different to other forms of
marketing. Moreover, to be a successful influencer requires mastery over certain technological
and self-presentation skills. 25
Before the advent of social media and the language of ‘influencing’, influencers (who were
then known as opinion leaders or media personalities) were ‘a kind of elite’ – those with the
access and skills to interpret mass media, command attention, and then pass on their
understandings and opinions to the public. 26 Celebrities (mostly TV and film stars) were a
branch of this group, selling products and services through their mystique and allure. Today,
the accessibility of social media means that, in theory, anyone can become an influencer. 27
Current influencers are marked out from traditional opinion leaders and even celebrities,
because they also share details of their daily, personal lives, making them ‘more accessible,
relatable, believable, and intimate to followers’. 28 However, social media also adds a third
stakeholder group to the classic influencer-audience model: the platform. 29 The platform’s
21
For examples of law firms using TikTok see Tiana Headley, Big Law’s TikTok Stars Embrace Industry’s New
Social Media Norms, (Jul. 12, 2021), https://news.bloomberglaw.com/business-and-practice/big-laws-tiktok-
stars-embrace-industrys-new-social-media-norms.
22
Crystal Abidin, “Aren’t These Just Young, Rich Women Doing Vain Things Online?”: Influencer Selfies as
Subversive Frivolity, 2 SOCIAL MEDIA + SOCIETY 2056305116641342 (SAGE Publications Ltd Jan. 2016).
23
Chen Lou & Shupei Yuan, Influencer Marketing: How Message Value and Credibility Affect Consumer Trust
of Branded Content on Social Media, 19 JOURNAL OF INTERACTIVE ADVERTISING 58 (Routledge Feb. 2019);
Sylvia Chan-Olmsted & Hyehyun Julia Kim, Influencer Marketing Dynamics: The Roles of Social Engagement,
Trust, and Influence, in THE DYNAMICS OF INFLUENCER MARKETING 101 (Routledge 2022).
24
P. K. Kannan & Hongshuang “Alice” Li, Digital Marketing: A Framework, Review and Research Agenda, 34
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN MARKETING 22, 23 (Jan. 2017).
25
Maddox, supra note 18, at 3–4.
26
ALAN CHARLESWORTH, ABSOLUTE ESSENTIALS OF DIGITAL MARKETING 42 (Routledge 1st ed. 2020); ELIHU
KATZ & PAUL F. LAZARSFELD, PERSONAL INFLUENCE: THE PART PLAYED BY PEOPLE IN THE FLOW OF MASS
COMMUNICATIONS (Free Press 1955).
27
Kaja J. Fietkiewicz et al., Dreaming of Stardom and Money: Micro-Celebrities and Influencers on Live
Streaming Services, Social Computing and Social Media. User Experience and Behavior 240 (Gabriele Meiselwitz
ed., Springer International Publishing 2018).
28
Chan-Olmsted & Kim, supra note 25, at 102; Abidin, supra note 24.
29
Jonathon Hutchinson & Tim Dwyer, How Instagram and YouTube Users Share News: Algorithms, Monetization
and Visibility on Social Media, in THE DYNAMICS OF INFLUENCER MARKETING 126 (Routledge 2022).

algorithms 30 adapt to audience preferences (in a process known as ‘personalization’), 31 which
in turn shape, and usually ultimately dictate, the actions of influencers. As we detail shortly in
Part II.C, this dynamic between influencer, audience, and platform has been deemed the
‘platformization’ of cultural production, 32 in which ‘the processes of content creation align
with the affordances of platforms’ and their commercial models. 33
Meanwhile, the term ‘micro-celebrity’ has emerged to describe the practices influencers use
on social media to successfully build their personal ‘brand’ and sometimes establish fame, but
on a small scale, or in a specific (‘micro’) domain. 34 Micro-celebrities self-present as a ‘public
persona to be consumed by others, use strategic intimacy to appeal to followers, and regard
their audiences as fans’. 35 Branding is about creating symbols (ideas, qualities, images etc.) for
a commodity, ‘which ostensibly simplifies the consumer’s decision-making’. 36 By sharing
their videos on popular apps such as TikTok or YouTube, influencers hope to construct and
project themselves as a brand. 37 They seek to entice the public, as potential consumers, to
engage with videos and, usually, also to buy their products and/or services. Influencers
primarily generate revenue through engagement (from platform ‘payouts’ once a certain
number of viewing hours are met and from then dependent on views), advertisements
embedded in videos, 38 and affiliate links. 39
The performance of microcelebrity was initially centred on lifestyle topics and within
consumer industries such as travel, beauty, and fashion. However, ‘knowledge influencers’
now engage in these practices to curate their image in certain ways. 40 Knowledge influencers
share technical ‘information and expertise to lay audiences’ often interwoven with ‘personal
posts or humorous anecdotes’ about professional life. 41 As signalled in the Introduction, these
influencers build their brand, then, on both elite, erudite knowledge (‘professionalism’) and
30
Informally, an algorithm is any well-defined computational procedure that takes some value, or set of values,
as input and produces some value, or set of values, as output in a finite amount of time. An algorithm is thus a
sequence of computational steps that transform the input into the output. THOMAS H. CORMEN ET AL.,
INTRODUCTION TO ALGORITHMS 5 (The MIT Press 4th ed. 2022).
31
Urbano Reviglio & Claudio Agosti, Thinking Outside the Black-Box: The Case for “Algorithmic Sovereignty”
in Social Media, 6 SOCIAL MEDIA + SOCIETY 2056305120915613, 2 (SAGE Publications Ltd Jan. 2020).
32
D. B. Nieborg & T. Poell, The Platformization of Cultural Production: Theorizing the Contingent Cultural
Commodity, 20 NEW MEDIA & SOCIETY (Nov. 2018).
33
Hutchinson & Dwyer, supra note 31, at 124.
34
Theresa M. Senft, Microcelebrity and the Branded Self, A COMPANION TO NEW MEDIA DYNAMICS 346 (Wiley
Online Library 2013).
35
Maddox, supra note 18, at 2; Alice E. Marwick, You May Know Me from YouTube: (Micro-)Celebrity in Social
Media, in A COMPANION TO CELEBRITY 333, 335 (John Wiley & Sons, Ltd 2015).
36
Khamis et al., supra note 11, at 192.
37
Hearn & Schoenhoff, supra note 11, at 242.
38
Carsten Schwemmer & Sandra Ziewiecki, Social Media Sellout: The Increasing Role of Product Promotion on
YouTube, 4 SOCIAL MEDIA + SOCIETY 2056305118786720 (SAGE Publications Ltd Jan. 2018).
39
Crystal Abidin, Influencer Extravaganza: Commercial “Lifestyle” Microcelebrities in Singapore, in THE
ROUTLEDGE COMPANION TO DIGITAL ETHNOGRAPHY 158 (Routledge 2016); BROOKE ERIN DUFFY, (NOT)
GETTING PAID TO DO WHAT YOU LOVE: GENDER, SOCIAL MEDIA, AND ASPIRATIONAL WORK (Yale University
Press 2017); Mariah L. Wellman et al., Ethics of Authenticity: Social Media Influencers and the Production of
Sponsored Content, 35 JOURNAL OF MEDIA ETHICS 68, 69 (Routledge Feb. 2020).
40
41
Id. at 2; Arantxa Vizcaíno-Verdú & Crystal Abidin, TeachTok: Teachers of TikTok, Micro-Celebrification, and
Fun Learning Communities, 123 TEACHING AND TEACHER EDUCATION 103978 (Jan. 2023).

relatability (‘amateurism’). Indeed, to capture this contrived aspect, Maddox has proposed the
term ‘calibrated expertise’ to ‘describe the performance strategy in which [professional]
experts harness social media affordances, platform dynamics, and aspects of micro-celebrity to
impart information’. 42 These knowledge influencers now span the fields of medicine, 43
dentistry, 44 finance, 45 and as we illuminate, law. Whatever they are selling (a product or
professional service or both, for example), influencers are selling an identity that is ‘singularly
charismatic and responsive to the needs and interests of target audiences’. 46
To give some perspective to this discussion in the legal (and professional) context, traditionally,
the legal profession’s ‘influence’ was over barriers to entry (gender, race, social background,
qualifications etc.); knowledge and expertise; and government audiences which granted it an
effective monopolies on the courts, legal work, and the profession’s own rules and regulation. 47
At least in England and Wales and the common law countries, status (or ‘influence’) was
achieved through a combination of such controls, built on the profession’s historical attachment
to elite institutions, including the Crown, certain prestigious schools and, later, universities. In
this configuration, legal knowledge and the entire legal system including its cultures, practices,
and the identities of its members were, for most, shrouded in mystique. This exclusivity had
and has (to the extent and in the forms it still exists) functional roles, including in the
maintenance of the law’s objectivity and predictability (and their appearance), and of the
profession’s trustworthiness. These means of influence also secured lawyers’ financial and
status rewards; and in consideration, lawyers were required to commit to public-minded, ethical
behaviour.
With an effective monopoly from the state, lawyers were prohibited from advertising or touting
for work (a practice they ought not have felt the need to engage in). This prohibition, and other,
related customs and rules of ‘etiquette’ were formalised into statutes and regulation. 48 To
engage in advertising or marketing would mean that lawyers could not turn to their fiduciary
obligations, and lawyers in competition with each other would undermine the collegial spirit
and altruism of the profession. 49 Finally, and at the interpersonal level, lawyers historically had
(and have) influence over their clients (especially more vulnerable, individual clients).
However, for most of the profession’s history, this relationship was not the critical level of the
42
43
Marah Fields, Can #DoctorsofTikTok Be Held Accountable?, CARDOZO ARTS & ENTERTAINMENT LAW
JOURNAL BLOG 6 (Mar. 2022).
44
Kathleen Nichols, What Are the Ethical Considerations of Using Video Social Media Platforms Such as TikTok
in Your Dental Practice?, 153 THE JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN DENTAL ASSOCIATION 1191 (Elsevier Jan. 2022).
45
Nikita Aggarwal et al., #Fintok and Financial Regulation, No. 4216952 (Dec. 2022); Tamra Manfredo, How to
Make $1 Million in Thirty Seconds or Less: The Need for Regulations on Finfluencers, 84 LOUISIANA LAW
REVIEW, FORTHCOMING (2022).
46
Khamis et al., supra note 11, at 191.
47
For a vivid history, see RICHARD L. ABEL, THE LEGAL PROFESSION IN ENGLAND AND WALES (Blackwell 1988);
RICHARD L. ABEL, ENGLISH LAWYERS BETWEEN MARKET AND STATE: THE POLITICS OF PROFESSIONALISM
(Oxford University Press 2003).
48
A. Keith Thompson, The History of Legal Marketing in Australia and New Zealand, in THE IMPACT OF LAW’S
HISTORY: WHAT’S PAST IS PROLOGUE 83, 92 (Sarah McKibbin et al. eds., Springer International Publishing 2022).
49
Anthony Gray, Advertising by Professions and the Competition and Consumer Act 2010 (Cth)., 40 AUSTRALIAN
BUSINESS LAW REVIEW 336, 336 (Thomson Reuters Nov. 2012); Justine Rogers et al., The Large Professional
Service Firm: A New Force in the Regulative Bargain Thematic: Contemporary Professionalism and Regulation,
40 U.N.S.W.L.J. 218 (2017).

profession’s collective authority. In contrast, the key level of power in lawfluencing is between
the individual lawyer and a group of anonymous people which the lawyer is trying to transform
into a loyal community, and possible consumers/clients of their legal services and other
products; but in this instance, where the lawyer’s activities are in turn shaped by that group’s
needs and appetites as consumers of social media more broadly. While lawyers have always
had to shift their work/service offerings to adapt to their clients’ projects and take advantage
of business opportunities, for example, 50 this type of influence is very different to traditional
professional influence and how the image (or brand) of the profession has been projected,
accessed, and constructed.
B What are Lawfluencers doing? What types of videos and other products are they
making?
The main types of videos that lawyers are making to self-represent, promote, and market
themselves are legal education (‘law explainers’); news (and legal) commentary, and video
blogs (‘vlogs’). Each of these are genres that have been created by the platforms and related
cultural trends, bringing their own styles and vernaculars. In all of these, the lawfluencers may
also be offering legal advice. To reiterate, lawyers are typically not making these types of
videos as one-way advertising (which legal video marketing might intend to), but rather as a
two-way interaction to build a loyal and ‘engaged’ audience or ‘community’. This is relevant
for two reasons here, first to indicate again that the videos and this influence are in many ways
co-constructed, based on the viewers’ desires (that are then shaped by wider trends in content
and viewing habits). Second, once the lawyer’s community is of a certain size, they can
monetise the videos and thus earn money regardless of whether the viewers themselves ever
pay for their legal services. 51 As a final note, while these genres are all largely shaped by the
platform and its culture and therefore all have elements of performed authenticity and
faddishness, they illustrate the spectrum from professionalism on one end, to amateurism on
the other, upon which the influencer must decide to position (and reposition) themselves.
Law explainers, as the first type, are videos that explain legal terminology, ideas, or processes
in a clear, accessible way. For example, on YouTube, Shouse Law Group (a Californian firm)
uploads one or two videos per week (usually two to five minutes long), with topics ranging
from recovery in hit-and-run car cases; use of California medical marijuana cards interstate;
and the legal outcomes of underage drinking. 52 Meanwhile, U.S. husband and wife lawyers,
Maclen and Ashleigh Stanley provide ‘bite sized’ explanations of legal jargon on TikTok
(@the.law.says.what) and also longer educational videos via YouTube. Having originally
started their TikTok in 2021 to promote their book about the law, they now have over 1 million
50
For example, see John Flood, Megalawyering in the Global Order: The Cultural, Social and Economic
Transformation of Global Legal Practice, 3 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION 169 (Routledge
Jan. 1996); John Flood, Lawyers as Sanctifiers: The Role of Elite Law Firms in International Business
Transactions, 14 IND. J. GLOBAL LEGAL STUD. 35 (2007).
51
Abidin, supra note 41; Liselot Hudders et al., The Commercialization of Social Media Stars: A Literature
Review and Conceptual Framework on the Strategic Use of Social Media Influencers, 40 INTERNATIONAL
JOURNAL OF ADVERTISING 327, 336–38 (Routledge Mar. 2021).
52
Larry Zimmerman, Lawyer Content on YouTube Law Practice Management Tips and Tricks, 87 J. KAN. B.
ASS’N 16 (2018).

followers. 53 While the Stanleys’ topics are generalist, other lawyers ‘specialise’ their
lawfluencing by focusing on their practice areas. For example, U.S. lawyer, Limor
Mojdehiazad (@lawyerlimor) has built an audience of some half a million by creating videos
on family and divorce law, with her biography describing herself as ‘Attorney
Analysis&Commentary On Celeb Legal News’ [sic]. 54
In addition to direct, transmission teaching, another common approach to a law explainer is for
the creator-lawyer to share a video clip of a real-life legal offence, poll the audience on who
they think is liable, and then reveal the answer in a separate video with legal commentary. 55
This type of video is likely more engaging and interactive for audiences, but is also closer to
giving legal advice than merely explaining the law in general terms (the concerns about which
we address in Part III). One of the most successful lawfluencers, U.S. lawyer, Erika Kullberg
(@erikakullberg), uses this more specific approach to content creation. 56 Her signature videos
offer viewers advice about how to read and execute the fine print of certain contracts (from
American Airlines to Nike). These typically involve Kullberg acting out all the roles in a
scenario, for instance, a consumer exercising their consumer rights against a store
representative. She also directly asks her followers what legal questions they would like
answered in subsequent videos. At time of writing, Kullberg has amassed 9.2 million TikTok
followers and her videos have attracted a combined 66.9 million views (she has over 19 million
followers across all her platforms). 57 These are all ‘professional’ videos, but with different
degrees of calibration to make them more accessible and appealing.
Meanwhile, it is now common for people to access their news via social media. 58 Lawfluencers
have responded by producing news-driven video content, commenting not only on legal trials
but also on legal aspects of pop cultural, social, and political topics. American lawyer and
content creator, Cecilia Xie, advises lawyers to ‘take advantage’ of popular trials, ‘particularly
involving celebrities’ ‘to give your own take on the proceedings and establish yourself as an
authority’. 59 A striking illustration was John C Depp, II v Amber Laura Heard (CL-2019-2911)
(‘Depp v Heard’), in which actor, Johnny Depp sued his ex-wife, Amber Heard for US$50
million in defamation damages over a 2018 op-ed she wrote alleging he had abused her. The
trial was broadcast live from court each day, accelerating a ‘booming trend of amateur and
professional legal analysts amassing huge social media audiences’. 60 Amongst the lawyers
dissecting the case was Emily Baker, former Deputy District Attorney for Los Angeles, whose
YouTube page now has some 700,000 followers. 61 Baker livestreamed hours of analysis daily,
53
Kim Wright, TikTok’s ‘Harvard Law Spouses’ Explain Legal Jargon for the Masses, HARVARD LAW SCHOOL,
https://hls.harvard.edu/today/tiktoks-harvard-law-spouses-explain-legal-jargon-for-the-masses/ (last visited Nov.
26, 2022).
54
Lawyerlimor, TIKTOK, https://www.tiktok.com/@lawyerlimor?lang=en (last visited Apr. 22, 2023).
55
See for example, @ugolord, the self-proclaimed ‘TikTok Attorney’.
56
Erikakullberg, TIKTOK, https://www.tiktok.com/@erikakullberg?lang=en (last visited Apr. 22, 2023).
57
Id.
58
Hutchinson & Dwyer, supra note 31.
59
Cecillia Xie, How TikTok Can Revolutionize Your Legal Practice, 94 NEW YORK STATE BAR ASSOCIATION
JOURNAL 28, 28–30 (Mar. 2022).
60
Lindsay Dodgson & Charissa Cheong, The Depp v. Heard Trial Has Propelled Legal Experts into TikTok Fame,
Turning Them into the Internet’s Go-to Lawyers, INSIDER, https://www.insider.com/depp-v-heard-trial-lawyers-
experts-tiktok-media-fame-2022-5 (last visited Sep. 20, 2022).
61
Emily D. Baker, YOUTUBE, https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCE-laOeM9gLfTcWF4HRBPpA (last visited
Apr. 23, 2023).
10

including a five-hour livestream of the closing arguments, which alone attracted 2.3 million
views. 62 A journalist described this phenomenon of livestream video as ‘a bit like Court TV,
but with unvarnished analysis and a flood of quippy user comments coming in via Super Chat,
a YouTube tipping feature that allows users to have their comments highlighted on the
livestream [in exchange for a ‘tip’ or payment]’. 63 Meanwhile on TikTok, the Stanleys (the
lawyer duo mentioned above) made, for example, a one-minute video explaining a distinct, pop
cultural aspect of the Depp case (why Heard’s reference to British model, Kate Moss in her
testimony was likely to backfire) which attracted over 13 million views. As another journalist
observed, ‘[t]he legal commentators say they’re having fun — and making a tidy profit’. 64 This
monetisation element raises novel issues for legal professionalism, which we consider in Part
III.
Moreover, lawyers are also creating entertaining videos or online diaries, called vlogs. Social
media ‘users’ typically come online for fun, to vent, to escape, to feel a sense of belonging, or
simply to fill time.65 The top lawyer-creators are catering to these needs. Joining other
professionals engaging in similar activity, lawyers are providing ‘a day in the life of a lawyer’
or ‘behind the scenes’ videos of working in legal practice. These videos offer, or have been
described as offering, more realistic or ‘authentic’ pictures of the law than found in TV shows
and movies. 66 American lawyer Devin James Stone, known for his YouTube channel
LegalEagle, has a playlist of videos of himself titled ‘Real Lawyer Reacts!’, which he describes
as a ‘real lawyer’ reacting to:
‘…famous courtroom dramas like Law & Order, Suits, The Good Wife, A Few Good
Men, and My Cousin Vinny. Learn what is realistic and what is pure Hollywood as he
breaks down legal movies and TV shows.’ 67
Other lawfluencers are creating entertaining videos purely for engagement purposes (to
increase online presence and attract followers), for example filming themselves lip-syncing or
dancing. 68 On the professional-amateur spectrum, these videos sit furthest towards the amateur
(or trusted peer) end of the types described.
62
Emily D. Baker, Lawyer Reacts LIVE | Closing Arguments | Johnny Depp v. Amber Heard Trial Day 24,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yU-JwmBYZes (last visited Apr. 22, 2023).
63
Geoff Weiss, YouTube Channel LegalBytes Has Surged by Livestreaming the Depp vs. Heard Trial — and
Earned $5,000 in a Week, BUSINESS INSIDER, https://www.businessinsider.com/law-youtuber-legalbytes-
streaming-johnny-depp-amber-heard-trial-2022-4 (last visited Oct. 17, 2022).
64
Jessica Lucas, YouTube Lawyers Are Getting Famous Covering the Depp–Heard Trial, INPUT,
https://www.inputmag.com/culture/johnny-depp-amber-heard-trial-youtube-lawyers-commentary (last visited
Oct. 17, 2022).
65
Á. Dunne et al., Young People’s Use of Online Social Networking Sites - a Uses and Gratifications Perspective,
4 JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN INTERACTIVE MARKETING 46 (2010); A. Whiting & D. Williams, Why People Use
Social Media: A Uses and Gratifications Approach, 16 QUALITATIVE MARKET RESEARCH: AN INTERNATIONAL
JOURNAL 362 (2013).
66
Zimmerman, supra note 54.
67
LegalEagle, Real Lawyer Reacts!, YOUTUBE,
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLUvQ_mNbE83XwzqDWj6Sc9-UspQpxBy72 (last visited Apr. 23,
2023).
68
A search on TikTok for ‘lawyer dancing’ brings up various videos of lawyers and lawyers in firms dancing, for
a total view count of 20.9 million views.
11

Finally, lawyers are also using their videos and audience they create to sell products. We have
already mentioned how videos alone can generate income for lawfluencers; selling their own
or others’ products is another option. In other words, lawfluencing is not just about leading
viewers to ‘consume’ their legal services, but also to buy, for example books or merchandise
(‘merch’). For example, Legal Bytes, a YouTube channel by U.S. lawyer Alyte Mazeika has a
merchandise shop selling branded clothes, accessories, and drinkware. 69 Once lawfluencers
have built a community, these videos can instead of being embedded within videos, also be
more one-way, or more explicitly advertisements (e.g., on sponsored products or paid
partnerships). 70 Rudy Giuliani, perhaps best known for being Donald Trump’s lawyer, often
livestreamed or posted on social media while acting in significant political roles. 71 In these,
Giuliani directly advertised products including ‘gold coins, supplements, cigars, and protection
from “cyberthieves.”’ 72
It is common for lawfluencers to mix, match and combine these different types of content. For
example, LegalEagle, in addition to explaining courtroom dramas, also explains news, and sells
his own product, called Legal Eagle Prep, an online course designed for law students to
‘CRUSH law school[sic]’. 73
C What is driving the advent of Lawfluencers and shaping their activities?
As suggested in Part II.A, lawfluencing (and its associated advertising) deviates significantly
from the profession’s aristocratic ethos that ‘gentlemen did not spruik their wares’, 74 and the
traditional prohibitions on lawyers advertising generally. If we treat a practitioner at this time
as representing the profession – and therefore as part of its brand – then this was a certain type
of lawyer (for a long time, male) who dressed, spoke, and interacted in certain ways associated
with the upper class, and who acquired clients via word-of-mouth referrals. 75 Of course, several
demographic, social, and regulatory changes to the profession, particularly dramatic over the
course of the second half of the twentieth century, have meant that the profession now brands
itself and can be branded in complex, multi-faceted, and more and less distinct and deliberate
ways. In this section, we identify some of the recent drivers of lawyers now presenting and
marketing themselves and the law through lawfluencing or video-based social media.
First, a key enabler has been the broad marketisation of the profession, in which many of the
profession’s restrictive practices have been dismantled, replaced by new discourses, rules and
69
Legal Bytes, https://legal-bytes.creator-spring.com/ (last visited Apr. 22, 2023).
70
See for example: erikakullberg, Small Business Owner Tips #AdobeCoCreate #AdobePartner @adobeexpress
@We Met In Real Life, TIKTOK, https://www.tiktok.com/@erikakullberg/video/7115058860536253698?lang=en
(last visited Apr. 28, 2023); erikakullberg, The Lifehack to Stay Informed � #morningbrewpartner #ad, TIKTOK,
https://www.tiktok.com/@erikakullberg/video/7135505730571930881?lang=en (last visited Apr. 28, 2023).
71
Giuliani previously served as the United States Associate Attorney General from (1981-1983); the United States
Attorney for the Southern District of New York from (1983-1989) and the 107th Mayor of New York City (1994-
2001).
72
See documents and accompanying screenshots filed by Dominion Voting Systems in their $1.6bn suit against
Giuliani for defamation alleging he used his social media posts to make damaging, false claims the company had
engaged in election manipulation: US Dominion, Inc., Dominion Voting Systems, Inc., and Dominion Voting
Systems Corporation v. Rudolph W. Giuliani, No. 1:2021cv00213 (D.D.C. 2021).
73
LegalEaglePrep, https://www.legaleagleprep.com (last visited Apr. 24, 2023).
74
Kathryn Millist-Spendlove, Websites, Social Media and a Barrister’s Practice, (Summer 2013-14) THE
JOURNAL OF THE NSW BAR ASSOCIATION 49.
75
Thompson, supra note 50, at 84–94.
12

regulations supporting competition and consumerism. 76 These moves have been driven largely
by government and large commercial law firms. 77 For common law countries at least, there is
no longer any express prohibition on advertising so long as it is not false, misleading or
deceptive, offensive or illegal. 78
A second, critical driver is technology; the internet revolution has offered and created new ways
to form communities, interact socially, spend time, and do business. Both software and
hardware have advanced monumentally. Across all their devices, the typical internet user, now
spends seven hours per day on the internet, 35% of which is on social media. 79 In turn, the way
we ‘consume’ information and make purchasing decisions has changed. 80 Platforms allow
anyone to ‘broadcast the self’, increasingly now in video format. 81 For so-called content
creators, the ubiquity of high-resolution cameras, cheaper mobile internet, and easy-to-use
production tools have dramatically lowered barriers to entry for video content. Every minute,
500 hours of content is uploaded to YouTube (compared to 48 hours in 2013) and over 167
million videos are played on TikTok. 82 Indeed, TikTok has been the most frequently
downloaded app since 2018 in part because of the accessibility of short-form video content. 83
The COVID-19 pandemic, which normalised video conferencing and online interaction,
accelerated these trends.
Third, certain social and political changes have influenced marketing trends – including the
current ‘authenticity’ fad – which in turn is shaping how lawfluencers are proceeding.
Authenticity denotes being true to oneself and others, and faithful to one’s personality, values
and beliefs. 84 To successfully perform online, influencers must be perceived by their followers
as authentic. 85 Video is an effective medium in conveying (and constructing) an authentic
identity, because it can create a sense of transparency, intimacy and trust. 86 By the mid-2000s,
a ‘small but growing number of lawyers [were] starting to use video as a way to grab and hold
on to-a potential client's attention.’ 87 Video marketing was endorsed by legal marketing
professionals as ‘the perfect icebreaker: adding a face-to-face element’ that could help induce
76
Julian Webb, Turf Wars and Market Control: Competition and Complexity in the Market for Legal Services, 11
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THE LEGAL PROFESSION 81, 2 (Mar. 2004).
77
Withheld for review.
78
See AUSTL. SOLICITORS’ CONDUCT RULES (2015) r 36; MODEL RULES OF PROF'L CONDUCT r. 7.1 (AM. BAR.
ASS’N 2018); Code of Conduct § 8.8 (SOLICITORS REG AUTH 2018).
79
Simon Kemp, Digital 2022: Time Spent Using Connected Tech Continues to Rise, DATAREPORTAL – GLOBAL
DIGITAL INSIGHTS, https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2022-time-spent-with-connected-tech (last visited
Dec. 7, 2022).
80
Lucia Malär et al., Emotional Brand Attachment and Brand Personality: The Relative Importance of the Actual
and the Ideal Self, 75 JOURNAL OF MARKETING 35 (SAGE Publications Inc Jan. 2011).
81
M. Laeeq Khan, Social Media Engagement: What Motivates User Participation and Consumption on YouTube?,
66 COMPUTERS IN HUMAN BEHAVIOR 236, 237 (Jan. 2017); J. Burgess & J. Green, The Entrepreneurial Vlogger:
Participatory Culture Beyond the Professional-Amateur Divide, THE YOUTUBE READER 89 (2009).
82
Data Never Sleeps 10.0, DOMO, https://www.domo.com/data-never-sleeps (last visited Apr. 24, 2023).
83
Given its success, there has been the launch of ‘copycat’ short-form video applications - Instagram launched
‘Instagram reels’ in August 2020, LinkedIn Stories in October 2020 and YouTube Shorts in July 2021.
84
Sigurður Kristinsson, Authenticity, Identity, and Fidelity to Self, HOMMAGE À WLODEK. PHILOSOPHICAL PAPERS
DEDICATED TO WLODEK RABINOWICZ 1 (2007).
85
Hudders et al., supra note 53, at 356.
86
Chan-Olmsted & Kim, supra note 25, at 103.
87
Chanen, Ideas from the Front, 92 A.B.A. J. 19, 19 (2006).
13

trust 88 and also a way for smaller firms to compete on a more even playing field than larger
firms’ (and their larger marketing budgets). 89 Today, the same principles are being applied on
a much wider scale with lawfluencers. As American legal digital marketing agency,
Good2BSocial notes:
Legal video marketing is more relevant than it has ever been. Nearly 90 percent of
marketing professionals use video as a marketing tool. Video marketing dominates
because it gets results. Individuals are likely to select a law practice based on the quality
and messaging of their digital video presence. 90
Meanwhile, much of how any influencing is playing out hinges on the mechanics and business
models of the platforms themselves. Video platforms in particular allow creators to respond to
their audience and interact with them in real-time, for example answering questions or fielding
suggestions for what to produce next. This so-called ‘co-creation of value’ 91 is then reinforced
through interactivity amongst the consumers or audience members themselves. 92 Increasingly
then, both the meaning of value and the process of value creation are rapidly shifting away
from product and firm-centric views to personalized consumer experiences. 93 Moreover, social
media platforms have subscribe, comment, and share features which can generate strong ‘in-
group’, community membership effects. The dynamics of homophily—in which perceived
similarity leads to attraction—can amplify any sense of authenticity felt by audiences when
engaging with an influencer’s content wherever it lies on the professional-amateur
continuum. 94
Moreover, in the pursuit of financial rewards and/or cultural capital, content creators are
incentivised by the platforms to support the platform’s business goals: to produce content most
likely to engage and keep viewers glued to the platform. 95 This applies to the topic overall –
for example the areas where the most content is being created on YouTube (Gaming, Make-up
& Beauty, Reviews & Unboxing, ASMR, and Vlogging etc.) are also those areas with the
highest amounts of engagement. 96 As such, where an algorithm signals that a particular topic
is trending, ‘online content producers will notice this platform and audience shift – likely
88
Diana D’Itri, Growing Your Practice with Online Video - 10 Tips for Getting in Front of Prospective Clients,
35 LAW PRAC. 46 (2009).
89
Adam L. Stock, How Lawyers Are Using Video, 37 LAW PRAC. 40 (2011).
90
Guy Alvarez et al., The Social Law Firm Index 2022 (2022).
91
Stephen L. Vargo et al., On Value and Value Co-Creation: A Service Systems and Service Logic Perspective,
26 EUROPEAN MANAGEMENT JOURNAL 145 (Jan. 2008); Roderick J. Brodie et al., Customer Engagement:
Conceptual Domain, Fundamental Propositions, and Implications for Research, 14 JOURNAL OF SERVICE
RESEARCH 252, 253 (SAGE Publications Inc Jan. 2011).
92
Avi Goldfarb & Catherine Tucker, Online Display Advertising: Targeting and Obtrusiveness, 30 MARKETING
SCIENCE 389 (INFORMS May 2011).
93
As business professors Prahalad and Ramaswamy explain: ‘The interaction between the firm and the consumer
is becoming the locus of value creation and value extraction. As value shifts to experiences, the market is
becoming a forum for conversation and interactions between consumers, consumer communities, and firms.
It is this dialogue, access, transparency, and understanding of risk-benefits that is central to the next practice in
value creation.’ C.K. Prahalad & Venkat Ramaswamy, Co-Creation Experiences: The next Practice in Value
Creation, 18 JOURNAL OF INTERACTIVE MARKETING 5, 5 (SAGE Publications Jan. 2004).
94
95
Luke Munn, Angry by Design: Toxic Communication and Technical Architectures, 7 HUMANIT SOC SCI
COMMUN No. 1, 1, 8 (Palgrave Jul. 2020).
96
14

through their analytics’ and adapt their content to match. 97 To further maximise engagement,
content creators (including lawfluencers) also use common digital marketing strategies, 98 such
as ‘clickbait’ titles (sensationalist names for their videos), 99 catchy promotional images
(‘thumbnails’), engaging, exaggerated captions, and/or metadata such as hashtags. 100
As a final driver, knowledge influencing in particular is an outcome of the neoliberal
movement, as scholars in the field have noted, in which lines have been blurred between work
and play, as well as between expertise and entertainment. 101 Several studies have shown how
the logic of entrepreneurialism and aggressive profit-seeking have affected professionalism,102
and to some extent influencing is simply a way for lawyers to achieve ‘additional revenue
streams’ including against rising costs of living and other financial pressures. 103 Where
however, these marketing tactics are taken to their extreme, (such as in the case of Giuliani
hawking sponsored products and directing his viewers to use an eponymous promotion code)104
the potential to undermine the credibility of the profession is high. 105 We now turn to these
concerns.
III IMPLICATIONS FOR PROFESSIONALISM
In this part, we contemplate some of the meanings of influencing via video-based social media
platforms for lawyers’ professionalism. We look at three, overlapping dimensions of
professionalism that shape the trust and legitimacy of the profession and the legal system in
this context: access to justice and other public interest values; the client relationship and
fiduciary relationship; and the identity, status and welfare of lawyers, the profession, and the
legal system.
A Access to Justice and a Lawyer’s Other Public Interest Values
In some respects, lawyers’ use of video on social media platforms represents a new expression
of their rule of law values and public service duty to widen access to justice. Since the 1990s,
this public interest commitment contains a consumerist twist in which the law or the provision
97
Id. at 126.
98
Isabella Catelan Miragaia Dias & Lina Gomez-Vasquez, “I’ll Be Right There with You to Help You”: How
TikTok Health/Fitness Creators Use PR Strategies to Engage With Followers, 25th International Public Relations
Research Conference 37 (2022).
99
Anna-Katharina Jung et al., Click Me…! The Influence of Clickbait on User Engagement in Social Media and
the Role of Digital Nudging, 17 PLOS ONE e0266743 (Public Library of Science Jun. 2022).
100
Hutchinson & Dwyer, supra note 31, at 126; Christina Newberry, How the TikTok Algorithm Works in 2022
(and How to Work With It), SOCIAL MEDIA MARKETING & MANAGEMENT DASHBOARD (Dec. 2, 2022),
https://blog.hootsuite.com/tiktok-algorithm/.
101
Maddox, supra note 18, at 5; Catherine Archer, Social Media Influencers, Post-Feminism and Neoliberalism:
How Mum Bloggers’ ‘Playbour’ is Reshaping Public Relations, 8 PUBLIC RELATIONS INQUIRY 149 (SAGE
Publications Jan. 2019).
102
Margaret Thornton, Legal Professionalism in a Context of Uberisation, 28 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THE
LEGAL PROFESSION No. 0, 1 (Routledge Mar. 2021).
103
104
By inputting a promotional code (e.g., ‘Rudy’), Giuliani receives an affiliate fee (a commission paid for
generating a sale or lead).
105
Moreover, a tendency to over-commercialise one’s content can also backfire on the influencer themselves,
contributing to a perception that they have ‘sold out’, and lost some of their perceived authenticity and reliability.
Hudders et al., supra note 53, at 356.
15

of ‘legal services’ must also be transparent and oriented towards the welfare of the public as
consumers. Lawfluencing could be regarded, for example, as reworking the rule of law
principle of ‘open justice’—that the law both ought to be done, and seen to be done.106
Historically, this was achieved by having open, publicly accessible courtrooms. In practice,
most citizens have neither the inclination nor opportunity to physically attend hearings 107 and
most of their understanding of how the law operates is filtered through traditional media. 108 In
recent years, as the Depp v Herd trial exemplifies, a trend has emerged in which members of
the public ‘see the law’ via livestreamed hearings online. Not surprisingly, celebrity cases are
the most watched. For example, the six weeks broadcast of Depp v Herd on YouTube’s
Law&Crime Network Channel comprised 83.9 million hours of viewing time, with a peak of
3.5 million simultaneous viewers during the announcement of the verdict. 109
Nonetheless, as Susskind and Susskind have noted, while the internet is providing access to
greater quantities of legal knowledge or ‘content’ than ever before (in this case full legal trials),
most of this information is indiscernible to the non-specialist. 110 This observation might help
explain the colossal view counts of lawfluencer (explanatory etc.) content. The number of
views on lawfluencer content about the Depp trial, for example, are even more staggering than
the trial itself. To illustrate, a 56 second video from Arizonan lawyers, Mark and Alexis Breyer
(@husbandandwifelawteam), analysing the risk of jury bias as a result of Heard drinking a pink
liquid from her water bottle in court, attracted 6.4 million views. 111 Meanwhile, Mandell’s
(@Law By Mike) YouTube explainer video, ‘Trial Explained in 60 Seconds!’ has received
over 10 million views. By educating the public, lawfluencers are distilling masses of newly
available legal information. They are redressing, then, the knowledge imbalance between
lawyer and layperson—often called ‘informational asymmetry’—a central priority of the
consumer movement. In the context of the profession having historically performed poorly in
ensuring public understanding of the law and legal processes, this could be seen as a welcome
change.
Conversely, and to anticipate some of the latter discussion about the implications of
lawfluencing for the institution, 112 what is being shared about the law’s meaning and values is
not within the full control of lawyers in any practical sense (let alone of the wider profession).
We have already illustrated how lawfluencers often let their viewers decide the direction of
their content through functions on the apps, primarily the comments. Also, as indicated, an
even greater influence on the content is the platform, or the process of so-called
platformization, in which the influencer tries to play the algorithms to maximise views,
106
Scott v Scott [1913] AC 417; JOSEPH JACONELLI, OPEN JUSTICE: A CRITIQUE OF THE PUBLIC TRIAL 1–3 (Oxford
University Press 1st edition ed. May 2002)..
107
Michael Legg et al., Open Justice during a Pandemic – The Role and Risks of Remote Hearings, 33 PUBLIC
LAW REVIEW 143, 146 (2022).
108
Sharon Rodrick, Achieving the Aims of Open Justice - The Relationship between the Courts, the Media and the
Public, 19 DEAKIN L. REV. No. 1, 123, 158 (2014).
109
Bohdan Zaveruha, Depp vs. Heard - How Many Viewers Watched the Trial,
https://streamscharts.com/news/johnny-depp-vs-amber-heard-trial-viewership (last visited Mar. 29, 2023).
110
RICHARD E. SUSSKIND & DANIEL SUSSKIND, THE FUTURE OF THE PROFESSIONS: HOW TECHNOLOGY WILL
TRANSFORM THE WORK OF HUMAN EXPERTS 150 (Oxford University Press 1st ed ed. 2015).
111
husbandandwifelawteam, What Amber is Drinking!!, TIKTOK,
https://www.tiktok.com/@husbandandwifelawteam/video/7095075061689830702?q=husbandandwifelawteam
%20depp%20heard&t=1682300426601 (last visited Apr. 24, 2023).
112
See Part III.C.
16

engagement, and profits. 113 Lawyers aren’t just commenting on the law from a ‘public service’
starting point, they are responding to our thirst for celebrity cases. Gwyneth Paltrow’s recent
ski accident case, for example, was watched by over 30 million people. 114 In other words, this
is ‘calibrated’ – and celebrated – access to justice.
At the same time, video marketing on social media might be closing gaps by giving members
of the public a greater selection of lawyers from which to choose, including low-cost options.
Once remote figures, hidden in offices and courtrooms—lawfluencers may make lawyers
easier to find and/or appear more approachable than before. In this way, lawfluencing seems
to support the consumerist argument that we need to increase the range of opportunities for and
means by which consumers can access legal services. 115 But again, these issues are not easy to
pin down: a critical access to justice issue is the client’s informed choice, about which lawyer
and at what cost. In this online context, on the one hand, consumers might find more low-fee
options – while being concurrently underequipped to assess risks that might attach to that low-
cost work. 116 Furthermore, if they choose an influencer (who is more likely to be found and/or
may seem more trustworthy), consumers may be more likely to be overcharged or at least
charged more than they would with another lawyer providing the same level of service. These
are speculative points that require further study, 117 but based on how influencers are usually
able to command a ‘price premium’ for their brand, 118 it is logical that lawyers too could charge
higher fees than they could before having a lawfluencer profile.
Moreover, consumers may find it difficult to evaluate the qualifications and expertise of
lawfluencers. Wily lawyers may take advantage of the deregulated nature of the internet to fake
or inflate their expertise. This has already occurred in the medical field as Maddox has pointed
out. 119 Steven Ho (@steveioe), a former emergency room (ER) technician, became a
microcelebrity on TikTok from his humorous videos and advice about ER care. However,
‘investigative users’ discovered Ho had only worked in an ER for a very short period and had
no medical training despite his videos implying he had substantial expertise. 120 Since the
revelation, Ho’s biography now states:
Jokes Not Advice
� 121
Not a Doctor. Retired ER Tech�
113
Nieborg & Poell, supra note 34.
114
Matt Donnelly, Gwyneth Paltrow Ski Trial Ratings: 30 Million People Saw Livestream - Variety, VARIETY,
https://variety.com/2023/film/news/gwyneth-paltrow-ski-trial-ratings-30-million-1235570307/ (last visited Apr.
28, 2023).
115
Dana Remus & Frank Levy, Can Robots Be Lawyers: Computers, Lawyers, and the Practice of Law 30th
Anniversary Commemorative Issue, 30 GEO. J. LEGAL ETHICS 501, 544 (2017).
116
Vicki Waye et al., Innovation in the Australian Legal Profession, 25 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF THE LEGAL
PROFESSION 213, 222 (Routledge Apr. 2018); Felicity Bell & Justine Rogers, ‘Fit and Proper’ Coders? How
Might Legal Service Delivery by Non-Lawyers Be Regulated?, 24 LEGAL ETHICS 111 (Routledge Mar. 2021).
117
For example, whether there is any relationship or correlation between a lawfluencer’s number of followers and
their fees.
118
Price premium refers to the amount that consumers are willing to pay for the brand over that of another Richard
G. Netemeyer et al., Developing and Validating Measures of Facets of Customer-Based Brand Equity, 57
JOURNAL OF BUSINESS RESEARCH 209, 210 (Jan. 2004).
119
120
Id.
121
Steveioe, TIKTOK, https://www.tiktok.com/@steveioe?lang=en (last visited Apr. 24, 2023).
17

But this disclaimer and clarification relied upon Ho being ‘audited’ by users themselves, which
is not assured. In a platformed context where personal reputation and branding are critical,
there is a real risk of similar subterfuge by self-serving lawyers; especially given the
importance the profession places on status. Numerous cases of lawyers attempting to craft
‘perfect versions of themselves’ 122 online already exist. In re Svitlana E. Sangary, 123 the State
Bar of California suspended a lawyer found to have engaged in deceptive advertising for
sharing photoshopped images of herself with political figures and celebrities to try and appear
well-connected. Meanwhile, in Legal Services Commission v Reichman (‘Reichman’), 124
Australian law student, Jacob Reichman, was convicted for misrepresenting himself as a legal
practitioner on social media, allegedly trying to impress family and friends. 125 As Bromberg
and Ekert point out, Reichman demonstrates that ‘the court is likely to take social media
representations seriously, owing [to] its breadth of reach to members of the public the user does
not know and who could potentially be misled’. 126 Finally, despite being banned by regulators
from both practising law and providing financial services, former Australian barrister,
Dominique Grubisa continued to record and share ‘professional guru’ videos, with the
disclaimer these offered ‘general advice and [were] for educational purposes only’. 127 Grubisa
markets herself in terms compatible with access to justice values; selling herself as a Robin
Hood figure, 128 who made it her ‘passion and focus to level the playing field for everybody
when it came to accessing to the law, not just the wealthy’. 129
Of course, the bigger question here that also applies to unqualified or underqualified
influencers is whether those who are regulated are ‘necessarily and inevitably better placed
than others to provide competent and ethical legal services, and offer better protection’ 130 or
whether there is unjustified protectionism at play. For many, technology might be ‘the only
workable solution to the access to justice gap’ 131 – though, these writers typically refer to things
like chatbots and automated document assembly. It remains questionable whether justice
122
Evan Shirley, Lawyers, Social Networking, and How to Avoid Falling into Ethical Traps, 14 HAWAII BAR
JOURNAL 123, 127 (2011); Zawacki, supra note 15, at 122.
123
re Svitlana E. Sangary No 13-O-13838-DFM (Cal. State Bar Ct. Sept. 11, 2014).
124
Legal Services Commission v Reichman (Transcript of Proceedings, August 2014).
125
AAP, Queensland Law Student Fined for Faking Credentials, 9NEWS,
https://www.9news.com.au/national/law-student-fined-for-faking-credentials/05202b17-b320-45ff-bfa0-
f08c1bb125f2 (last visited Apr. 24, 2023).
126
Marilyn Bromberg & Andrew Ekert, Caution: Tweet at Your Own Risk: Social Media and the Australian Legal
Profession, 6 JOURNAL OF CIVIL LITIGATION AND PRACTICE 183, 190 (2017).
127
Max Mason, Grubisa Won’t Stop until Somebody Makes Her, AUSTRALIAN FINANCIAL REVIEW,
https://www.afr.com/rear-window/grubisa-won-t-stop-until-somebody-makes-her-20230216-p5ckzr (last visited
Apr. 24, 2023).
128
Independent Australia, ‘Robin Hood’ Grubisa Rolls on with Rotten Real Estate Advice, INDEPENDENT
AUSTRALIA, https://independentaustralia.net/business/business-display/robin-hood-grubisa-rolls-on-with-rotten-
real-estate-advice,17219 (last visited Apr. 24, 2023).
129
Dominique Grubisa, Special Briefing, DGINSTITUTE, https://www.dginstitute.com.au/mwc2023/ (last visited
Apr. 24, 2023).
130
Stephen Mayson, Independent Review of Legal Services Regulation: The Focus of Legal Services Regulation
182 (Mar. 2020).
Remus & Levy, supra note 117, at 544; John McGinnis & Russell Pearce, The Great Disruption: How Machine
Intelligence Will Transform the Role of Lawyers in the Delivery of Legal Services, 82 FORDHAM LAW REVIEW
3041 (Jan. 2014); BENJAMIN H. BARTON, GLASS HALF FULL: THE DECLINE AND REBIRTH OF THE LEGAL
PROFESSION (Oxford University Press Sep. 2015).131
18

through technology means legal services can be fully delivered via videos and chat on social
media.
B The Lawyer-Client Relationship, Fiduciary Obligations, and Customised Care
In the process of public engagement, lawyers may be breaching ethical or legal rules against
solicitation. 132 This may occur expressly (within videos or comments requesting viewers to
enlist them for legal services) or impliedly (through embedded links to their websites). 133 For
instance, Dominican lawyer, Kathleen Martinez (@attorneymartinez) lists on her TikTok
biography a link to book a legal consultation and to her paralegal training program, in addition
to her website, other social media, an affiliate link to beauty products she uses, and even the
outfits she wears. 134
There is also the risk of inadvertent lawyer-client relationships when marketing posts are
construed by viewers as legal advice to or implied retainers. 135 For example, New York lawyer
Alex Peter (@loloverruled) had to add a warning to his TikTok bio – ‘Not your lawyer’ – after
many of his followers referred to him as ‘our Lawyer’ or ‘their Lawyer’ and even confessed
crimes to him over TikTok direct message. 136
Such ethical risks are heightened on these high interaction platforms. To illustrate how these
direct communications occur, in one video by Miami lawyer, Caesar Chukwama (@iamcaez)
titled, ‘Can you get a DUI for sleeping in your car?’, 137 Chukwama provides general legal
advice by telling viewers to turn their car off, leave the keys out of reach and sit in the passenger
seat. Chukwama then responds to comments including:
User 1: How easily would that get thrown out in court tho [sic]?
Caesar Chukwama, Esq. (Creator): Legally wouldn’t get thrown out cause technically
it’s still a DUI. But in trial in front of a jury, different story.
User 2: If I put my keys in a location outside the vehicle before sleeping in it, is that
ok?
Caesar Chukwama, Esq. (Creator): Yes provided you cant quickly get it and operate
your vehicle. [sic]
132
MODEL RULES OF PROF'L CONDUCT r. 7.3 (AM. BAR. ASS’N 2018); Code of Conduct § 8.9 (SOLICITORS REG
AUTH 2018).
133
GINO DAL PONT, LAWYERS’ PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY 89–90 (Thomson Reuters 6th ed. 2017).
134
Attorney Kathleen Martinez, LINKTREE, https://linktr.ee/attorneymartinez (last visited Apr. 25, 2023).
135
Zawacki, supra note 15, at 124; Isabella M. Leavitt, Attorney Advertising in the Age of Reddit: Drafting Ethical
Responses to Prospective Clients in Online Non-Legal Forums Current Developments 2015-2016, 29 GEO. J.
LEGAL ETHICS 1111, 1112 (2016).
136
Samantha Berlin, Lawyer Asks Viewers to Stop Telling Him About Crimes They’ve Committed, NEWSWEEK,
https://www.newsweek.com/lawyer-goes-viral-after-asking-viewers-stop-telling-him-about-crimes-theyve-
committed-1662179 (last visited Apr. 25, 2023).
137
Caesar Chukwama, Can You Get a DUI for Sleeping in Your Car?, TIKTOK,
https://www.tiktok.com/@iamcaez/video/7153310085526162731 (last visited Apr. 25, 2023).
19

Another example is from Californian lawfluencers (and firm partners), David Pourshalimi and
Ben Perlmutter (@pandpfirm2.0): 138
User 1: How can I hire you bro? I’m facing dui charges in inland empire
User 2: Praying mines gets reduced or dismissed, cop gave the breathalyzer in 6 mins
instead of waiting 15 mins
David P (Creator): If you can prove that, you could potentially get your breath results
tossed out!
On the one hand, this type of communication seems like direct and customised advice, and
where such tailored advice is a hallmark of traditional professionalism. 139 However, while
effectiveness in influencer engagement hinges on creating relationships with viewers, 140 this
relationship is not protected in the same way a lawyer-client relationship is. Moreover,
professional work has also been associated with other aspects of quality such as time and
attention, 141 and yet lawfluencers, with thousands or even millions of followers are unlikely to
achieve these benchmarks. Because of the ease and (often) shortened format of video content
today, this advice is very likely to be ‘off the cuff’. As Hessick observes, albeit in the context
of law professors’ use of Twitter, social media’s low barriers to communication encourage
professionals to make statements they would never make in other contexts, including
statements outside their areas of expertise. 142
Having said this, as Noordegraaf points out, sometimes ‘professionalism’ means speed and
efficiency; high quality doesn’t have to mean bespoke. 143 Nonetheless, this is a new context
that is different than, say, new forms of managerialism in professional workplace settings
(where these blends have been seen and examined to date). On platforms, the nature of advice
given and whether it strikes the appropriate balance between efficiency and customisation is
significantly influenced by algorithms. The TikTok algorithm, for example, favours creators
who post frequently (particularly with frequently used hashtags), 144 at least once a day, with
some marketers advising ideally five posts daily. 145 Those who post regularly are highlighted
by the algorithm; receiving more views, subscribers and ultimately platform income.
Consequently, by design and platform incentive, as lawfluencers opt for quantity over quality,
advice is more likely to be rushed, poorly researched or even inaccurate. 146
138
DUI Charges DISMISSED for Reckless Driving Plea Client on DACA, TIKTOK,
https://www.tiktok.com/@pandpfirm2.0/video/7175320939125591338 (last visited Apr. 25, 2023).
139
Noordegraaf, supra note 21, at 187–88.
140
141
Noordegraaf, supra note 21, at 188.
142
Carissa Byrne Hessick, Towards a Series of Academic Norms for #LawProf Twitter Symposium: Conference
on the Ethics of Legal Scholarship, 101 MARQ. L. REV. 903, 912 (2018).
143
Noordegraaf, supra note 21, at 188.
144
Daniel Klug et al., Trick and Please. A Mixed-Method Study On User Assumptions About the TikTok Algorithm,
13th ACM Web Science Conference 2021 84, 8789 (Association for Computing Machinery Jun. 2021).
145
Talia Schwartz, How Lawyers Can Use TikTok To Generate Leads, GOOD2BSOCIAL,
https://good2bsocial.com/how-lawyers-can-use-tiktok-to-generate-leads/ (last visited Nov. 26, 2022);
Sapochnick, supra note 17.
146
Agnieszka McPeak, The Internet Made Me Do It: Reconciling Social Media and Professional Norms for
Lawyers, Judges, and Law Professors, 55 IDAHO L. REV. 205, 230 (2019).
20

In these new contexts for lawyers, and as a practical point, disclaimers are essential. These
include: ensuring viewers understand any interactions are ‘not intended to create an attorney-
client relationship’; 147 disclosing if any subject matter is outside their expertise, 148 and clearly
stating that none of the content amounts to ‘legal advice’. Meanwhile, lawfluencers who are
not qualified to practise can only provide ‘legal information’, however the line between that
and legal advice can easily be blurred by these mediums. 149
In addition, such interactions between lawyers and members of the public raise questions about
the lawyer’s fiduciary duties, including the duty of confidentiality (which can apply even
absent a retainer), as well as the client’s rights to privacy and informed consent. For example,
Pourshalimi and Perlmutter (introduced above) are known for uploading post-trial ‘victory’
videos with their clients outside of the courthouse in which they outline the trial details, the
strategies used, and the sentences received. These videos serve as client testimonials, in a
newer, possibly more ‘authentic’, benignly ‘amateurish’ form of referral compared to standard
text reviews or word-of-mouth. However, the videos attach the clients’ faces to the crimes as a
permanent record (including cases of alleged burglary and alleged violence on a minor etc.)
giving rise to privacy and confidentiality concerns. The immediate filming of these videos after
the trial also raise ethical questions around informed consent and power imbalances: at that
moment, outside the courthouse, clients may be overwhelmed with relief, gratitude, and
adrenaline, and/or feel put on the spot, dulling their decision-making.
Finally, marking themselves out from earlier forms of social media, and as part of the
authenticity/amateur trends, TikTok and BeReal ‘have come to incentivise users to share
workplace content’ as part of their authenticity narrative. 150 Dangers of ethical breaches may
also arise for example, in the office, when periphery computer screens or documents in videos
could allow viewers to zoom in on the content and see clients’ confidential information. 151
C Lawyers’ Autonomy and Wellbeing, the Legal Profession, and the Administration
of Justice
One of the chief concerns about the decline or reworkings of professionalism in the face of
increased commercialisation has been its threat to the autonomy and wellbeing of
practitioners. 152 On one hand, lawfluencing is a new income stream, both directly by
‘monetising’ the video itself, and also by attracting clients. Thus, we can see lawfluencing as
another way in which the law is being commodified and more profit-seeking. On the other
147
Xie, supra note 61.
148
Hessick, supra note 144, at 919.
149
Bell & Rogers, supra note 118, at 22; Remus & Levy, supra note 117, at 542.
150
Kimberly Henrickson & Christina Wabiszewski, Time is ‘TikTok’-Ing — “Being Real” About Preemptively
Addressing Employees’ Confidentiality and Privacy Breaches on Social Media, JD SUPRA,
https://www.jdsupra.com/legalnews/time-is-tiktok-ing-being-real-about-2386156/ (last visited Apr. 25, 2023).
151
Kristy Grant, BeReal: Can My Post Get Me in Trouble at Work?, BBC NEWS (Jul. 9, 2022),
https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-62795955.
152
Martin E. P. Seligman et al., Why Lawyers Are Unhappy, 23 CARDOZO L. REV. 33 (2001–2002); Jarrod F.
Reich, Capitalizing on Healthy Lawyers: The Business Case for Law Firms to Promote and Prioritize Lawyer
Well-Being, 65 VILL. L. REV. 361 (2020); Christine Parker, The ‘Moral Panic’ over Psychological Wellbeing in
the Legal Profession: A Personal or Political Ethical Response? Thematic: Contemporary Issues Facing the
Australian Legal Profession, 37 U.N.S.W.L.J. 1103 (2014); Cheryl Ann Krause & Jane Chong, Lawyer Wellbeing
as a Crisis of the Profession, 71 S. C. L. REV. 203 (2019–2020); Colin James, Lawyers’ Wellbeing and
Professional Legal Education, 42 THE LAW TEACHER 85 (Routledge Jan. 2008).
21

hand, this sort of activity might represent a new way in which lawyers can express themselves
and enjoy their work, where these platforms allow and ask for personal and professional
identities to be melded together. 153
At the same time, these issues are blurred and their ethicality, less than straightforward. For
example, digital marketers advise lawfluencers to ‘look inside their personalities’ for what
makes them unique, to sell as a point of distinction in a crowded market. 154 This sort of
advice—to marketise one’s personality—is about branding oneself and curating one’s
authenticity and amateurishness or non-professionality for a performance. Lawfluencers might
find fun in this display, including in having an overtly low-status alter ego; as an extreme
version, Kennedy’s inhabiting of the unscrupulous Saul Goodman. But it is still a sort of work,
to self-monitor and self-promote in such a crafted way; it may not be ‘true’ expression but
another way in which our lives are commodified. 155
The platforms also encourage ‘oversharing and disinhibition’. 156 Again, this drive for
authenticity could be a positive change for lawyers having to otherwise self-present in rigidly
‘professional’, deferential ways.
For example, popular U.K. YouTuber, Eve Cornwell produced candid, quirky videos about her
traineeship at global firm Linklaters, including “I’m not smart enough to be a lawyer”, 157 trying
to break, she said, the profession’s ‘perfection narrative’ by describing, for example, the
imposter syndrome she felt as a lawyer. 158 Such videos may also positively impact the
profession as a whole. Certainly, it may make firms seem more welcoming and inclusive for
hopeful lawyers, and firms have responded by making graduate recruitment videos on their
YouTube channels. Some lawfluencers also make videos for prospective clients, for example,
sharing videos of their office to allow a glimpse of the ‘space ahead of time and [give] a better
sense of the environment than they would from a photo on a firm’s website’. 159
But equally, this lack of restraint (whether staged or not) can also expose individual lawyers to
harm, such as negative comments from viewers and/or judgments from future employers and
colleagues. Moreover, these platforms do pose at least some degree of threat to the profession
and the administration of justice. The Depp v Herd case revealed the dangers of an
overpublicized case in which countless people, including lawyers, shared their opinion online.
Some commentators felt that Depp and his lawyer were exploiting the publicity to gain public
sympathy, including by appearing to flirt, share sweets, and secret smiles 160 or what we might
see as potentially contrived ‘amateur’ behaviour. 161 On the one hand, we don’t advocate
153
McPeak, supra note 148, at 226.
154
Nancy Myrland, Social Media Trends: Where Is It Going? What Has Changed?, ABA LAW PRACTICE
MAGAZINE (01/03/22).
155
Maddox, supra note 18.
156
157
Eve Cornwell, I’m Not Smart Enough to Be a Lawyer, YOUTUBE,
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d4WxjXcEa94 (last visited Apr. 28, 2023).
158
Akila Quinio, ‘Lawfluencers’ Open up the Magic Circle for New Recruits, FINANCIAL TIMES (Nov. 25, 2021).
159
Laura Brown, TikTok: The Newest Frontier of Legal Advertising, MINNESOTA LAWYER (Dec. 2, 2021)
(BridgeTower Media Holding Company, LLC), https://minnlawyer.com/2021/11/24/tiktok-the-newest-frontier-
of-legal-advertising/.
160
Danielle Braff, How Social Media Hijacked the Depp v. Heard Defamation Trial, 108 ABA JOURNAL 34 (Oct.–
Nov. 2022).
161
Abidin, supra note 19.
22

holding onto the formal lawyer persona for irrational, snobbish or classist reasons, but
performing to social media may entice lawyers to forego their independence from their client
and such practices (or their appearance) could, overtime, diminish the lawyer’s paramount duty
to the court, and public trust. Additionally, other commentators felt the principle of an
independent jury was compromised 162 – where the jury was more than possibly swayed by the
significant social media commentary; the majority of which was coming from lawfluencers.
Further, lawfluencers are incentivized by the algorithm to be among the first to offer quick,
polemic opinions (or ‘pithy generalizations and partisan fodder’ 163) in a kind of a ‘race to post’.
Sharing imprecise, false or (intentionally) incendiary information can reflect poorly on the
collective image of the profession and legal system. 164 Overall, these are all ways in which a
legal identity is being presented as casual and relatable; and the law, palatable and opinion-
based. 165
As a final point, in all of this discussion about professionalism, the technology and the wider
‘post-truth’ landscape are significant background concerns. 166 This article has shown how
people are increasingly using social media as a source of accurate and reliable information,
including with regards to professional expertise. TikTok’s ambition is to build the platform as
a ‘video encyclopedia’ 167 and for younger people (which make up the majority of users) it is
already being used as a replacement to Google as their primary search engine. 168 Critics have,
however, questioned the neutrality and objectivity of an encyclopaedic function built on
‘monetisation’. 169 One analysis by NewsGuard, a journalism tool for combating
misinformation, found that nearly one-fifth of 540 videos on TikTok about the news contained
false or misleading claims. 170 The danger is that this is occurring in a context in which
consumers’ level of trust influencers is at all-time highs, rivalling that of even people’s own
friends. 171 Unlike lay persons, a lawyer is ‘a professional trained in the art of persuasion.’172
As the judges observed in re Giuliani, the case suspending Giuliani’s licence to practice: 173
162
Waiyee Yip, Juror in the Depp v. Heard Trial Says the Jury Wasn’t Swayed by Social Media: ‘We Followed
the Evidence’, INSIDER, https://www.insider.com/johnny-depp-amber-heard-trial-jury-influenced-social-media-
juror-2022-6 (last visited Apr. 25, 2023).
163
Hessick, supra note 144, at 913.
164
Id. at 916.
165
166
Id. at 5.
167
Zongyi Zhang, Infrastructuralization of Tik Tok: Transformation, Power Relationships, and Platformization
of Video Entertainment in China, 43 MEDIA, CULTURE & SOCIETY 219, 221 (SAGE Publications Ltd Jan. 2021).
168
Kalley Huang, For Gen Z, TikTok Is the New Search Engine, THE NEW YORK TIMES (Sep. 16, 2022),
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/16/technology/gen-z-tiktok-search-engine.html.
169
Zhang, supra note 169, at 226–29.
170
Misinformation Monitor: September 2022, NEWSGUARD, https://www.newsguardtech.com/misinformation-
monitor/september-2022.
171
Marty Swant, Twitter Says Users Now Trust Influencers Nearly as Much as Their Friends,
https://www.adweek.com/performance-marketing/twitter-says-users-now-trust-influencers-nearly-much-their-
friends-171367/ (last visited Apr. 25, 2023).
172
Ohralik v Ohio State Bar Assn., 436 US 447, 465 [1978].
173
Attorney Grievance Comm. for the First Judicial Dep't v. Giuliani (In re Giuliani), 146 N.Y.S.3d 266, 197
A.D.3d 1 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021). The First Judicial Department, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of
New York found numerous instances of false statements and misleading information related to the 2020 election
and suspended Giuliani’s licence to practice and that he posed an “immediate threat” to the public interest.
23

As officers of the court, attorneys are “an intimate and trusted and essential part of the
machinery of justice” 174 In other words, they are perceived by the public to be in a
position of knowledge, and therefore, “a crucial source of information and opinion”.175
The hope is that knowledge influencers (including lawfluencers) can act as the trusted voices
within the crowd, filtering out the unreliable sources and information while continuing to
ethically adhere to their professional duties.
IV CONCLUSION
The law’s traditional belief systems and practices of professionalism have been drastically
challenged and altered over some time now, affecting the status and legitimacy of the legal
profession and legal system in different ways. This article looked at a particular change
phenomenon, the advent of ‘lawfluencing’. This is a significant change, not only because of its
varicoloured implications for professionalism but because it is change situated within (video-
based) social media platforms, largely under the control of Big Tech. Most of our recent studies
of professional change have been centred in the workplace organisation, showing how its
arrangements and priorities, and degree of ‘hybridisation’ with managerial methods and
corporate forms, are contorting professional practice, values and authority into new, more or
less distinct blends. 176 Other studies, closer to ours, have shown how new technologies and
their merits and biases, most notably AI, are impacting the practice, ethics and regulation of
lawyers, though again the site for this is typically the legal work context (e.g., law firms, the
courts). 177 Lawfluencing, by distinction, represents lawyers scoping out new contexts—video-
based social media platforms—within which to practice law, share their expertise, experiment
with their professional identity, create a community and social capital, and, ideally, earn
money; for some, even build a new career entirely. As our article demonstrated, in the process
of doing so, traditional professionalism, already alloyed by other changes and pressures, is
interacting with the emergent norms and metrics of these vast platforms. 178
174
Gentile v State Bar of Nevada, 501 US 1072 [1991].
175
Gentile v State Bar of Nevada, 501 US 1056 [1991].
176
Noordegraaf, supra note 21; James Faulconbridge & Daniel Muzio, Organizational Professionalism in
Globalizing Law Firms, 22 WORK, EMPLOYMENT AND SOCIETY 7 (SAGE Publications Ltd Jan. 2008); Royston
Greenwood & Laura Empson, The Professional Partnership: Relic or Exemplary Form of Governance?, 24
ORGANIZATION STUDIES 909 (SAGE Publications Ltd Jan. 2003); Laura Empson et al., Managing Partners and
Management Professionals: Institutional Work Dyads in Professional Partnerships, 50 JOURNAL OF
MANAGEMENT STUDIES 808 (2013).
177
Katherine Medianik, Artificially Intelligent Lawyers: Updating the Model Rules of Professional Conduct in
Accordance with the New Technological Era, CARDOZO LAW REVIEW, https://cardozolawreview.com/artificially-
intelligent-lawyers-updating-the-model-rules-of-professional-conduct-in-accordance-with-the-new-
technological-era/ (last visited Apr. 28, 2023); Mark McKamey, Legal Technology: Artificial Intelligence and the
Future of Law Practice, 22 APPEAL: REVIEW OF CURRENT LAW AND LAW REFORM 45 (Mar. 2017); Agnieszka
McPeak, Disruptive Technology and the Ethical Lawyer The Role of Technology in Professional Advice
Symposium, 50 U. TOL. L. REV. 457 (2018–2019); Julie Sobowale, How Artificial Intelligence is Transforming
the Legal Profession, ABA JOURNAL,
https://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/how_artificial_intelligence_is_transforming_the_legal_profession
(last visited Apr. 28, 2023); MICHAEL LEGG & FELICITY BELL, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND THE LEGAL
PROFESSION (Hart Publishing 1st edition ed. Nov. 2020).
178
24

This article provided a comprehensive account of what lawfluencing is, relating it to core
concepts from the growing studies of influencer marketing. Applying these concepts, it charted
and illustrated the types of videos or ‘content’ lawfluencers are making, the techniques they
are using to attract followers, and the main drivers behind its emergence and how it is playing
out. Our analysis of its implications for professionalism highlighted several points of tension
and complication. To highlight a few, we noted the possibility for influencing to be part of the
answer to the crisis of access to justice. On the other hand, lawfluencing also raises serious
concerns around a potential client’s informed choice, in relation to the lawyer’s qualifications
and experience, the reasonableness of their fees, and the protections in place should something
go wrong. All these elements can be falsified, exaggerated or the very least obscure in this
context. In addition, providing legal advice via interactive social media raises risks of
inadvertent retainers, and members of the public acting on low quality, off-the-cuff comments
as if it were considered legal advice. We also signalled out potential threats to the lawyer’s
fiduciary duties, including the duty of confidentiality, and the client’s right to privacy. These
are all areas where the norms and systems of accountability are not clear-cut. Our analysis also
revealed other possible implications of influencing for the legal system and certain rule of law
principles, with concerns raised about the lawyer’s duty to the court and independence from
their clients, the independence of the judiciary, and the court’s oversight on lawyers in their
professional capacities.
Turning to the lawyer themselves, we used concepts from media theory to highlight the ways
in which lawfluencing is a thought-provoking (and potentially persuasive) expression of legal
identity and expertise. The lawfluencer legal identity is more casual and relatable than the
traditional archetype, being aligned with online and pop cultural tropes or an ‘amateurish’
identity. This might offer a promising, fun escape for lawyers otherwise potentially narrowed
in by the disciplinary demands of professional self-concepts. However, as we showed,
performing online is not straightforward self-expression – it is a strategic and reproduced
performance as well, responding to the style and metrics of the platform, the audience’s needs,
requests, and behaviour, and those influencers who are achieving success. The platform and
the marketing advice around it ask lawyers to tap into and then commodify their ‘unique’
personalities, their ‘authentic’ ‘lives, leisure and play’, 179 which is a form of work.
From the perspective of the profession as a collective, and recognising that some of this is about
the profession’s own strategies for survival and status, lawyers operating across these platforms
are projecting less coherent, less distinct ‘brand’ or self-image. This may or may not matter but
what does matter is the possibility that in the wider, so-called ‘post-truth’ landscape,
professional trust can (and to some extent must) be secured and symbolised not solely (or even
necessarily) through the achievement of formal legal qualification and experience, but by the
technological skills and cultural nous around the desired blend of expert-amateur to make
effective and profitable use of video-based social media platforms. As mentioned above,
lawfluencers (as knowledge influencers) could be the trusted voices among otherwise a rowdy
and inaccessible online world; but they may otherwise or simultaneously exacerbate
institutional distrust, 180 with knock-on effects on the motivations of those lawyers who are
under the regulatory fold.
179
180
Id. at 22.
25

Finally, and as a challenge for the institution and individual level, our discussion pinpointed
the role of the platform’s ‘unseen’ technological infrastructure and business models in affecting
what lawyers (and other influencers) are producing and how this is being shared, seen and
‘consumed’ (or engaged with). 181 Some writers have concluded that these forces – manifesting
as ‘monetization triggers’ for the content creators are always more powerful in guiding conduct
than ‘regulatory levers’. 182 These writers were discussing content creators generally and not
licensed professionals with certain obligations and disciplinary oversight. Our article provides
evidence of professionals flouting or ignoring their professional obligations, but probably more
evidence of lawyers who are aware of their duties, by providing for instance, disclaimers and
warnings around their activities, if a little brief (e.g., ‘not your lawyer’). The professional
regulators face questions regarding their authority compared to that of Big Tech.
While we have set out a comprehensive first look at influencing in legal practice, specifically
via video-based social media, there are several avenues for further, empirical research. A future
study might try to quantify the numbers of lawyers engaged in influencing activity, and/or
undertake in-depth qualitative research to glean and compare the motivations, perceptions,
performance strategies, and experiences of lawfluencers from a wide range of personal
backgrounds and practice areas. Of value would be to understand how they navigate their
professional identities, commitments to their role as working lawyers, and the demands and
cultural cues of the platforms. Another useful contribution would be a closer examination of
the otherwise largely unnoticed infrastructure and business models of the social media
platforms and how they are shaping what is being made and shared online, particularly with
respect to professional knowledge and expertise. This could add to the discussion we have
started about the growing appeal of lawfluencing, the authority of social media platforms, and
what they mean for assumed correspondences between professional expertise and the
confidence in which that expertise can be held.
181
182
Id. at 135.
26

Journal - Legal Professionaism On Tiktok and Youtube

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal - Legal Professionaism On Tiktok and Youtube

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal - Legal Professionaism On Tiktok and Youtube

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lawfluencers: Legal Professionalism on TikTok and YouTube

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4470377

II Definitions, Forms & Drivers ............................................................................................. 6

A What is ‘lawfluencing’? .................................................................................................. 6

III Implications For Professionalism ................................................................................. 15

A Access to Justice and a Lawyer’s Other Public Interest Values ................................... 15

B The Lawyer-Client Relationship, Fiduciary Obligations, and Customised Care.......... 19

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4470377

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4470377

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4470377

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4470377

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4470377

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4470377

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4470377

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4470377

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4470377

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4470377

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4470377

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4470377

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4470377

III IMPLICATIONS FOR PROFESSIONALISM

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4470377

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4470377

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4470377

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4470377

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4470377

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4470377

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4470377

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4470377

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4470377

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4470377

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4470377

Electronic copy available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4470377

You might also like