Social media for law firms: the rules, and what to post inside them
The advertising rules for lawyers are stricter than for almost any other business, and they are also narrower than most firms assume. What Rule 7.1 and 7.3 actually say, and the posts that fit comfortably inside them.
Ask a room of lawyers why the firm does not post and you get one of two answers. Either it is beneath the practice, or somebody once heard that the bar rules make it impossible. The second answer is the more interesting one, because it is half right in a way that stops firms doing the parts that are completely permitted. The rules are strict, they are shorter than you think, and almost none of them touch the content that would actually bring you work.
Our articles are still written by humans!
Get human written articles in your Google feed.
It is worth being precise about why this matters commercially. Legal services are searched for by people in the worst week of their year, using language no lawyer would use. They type "can my landlord just keep my deposit", not "security deposit remedies". A firm that answers those questions in the words they were asked in has an enormous advantage over one that publishes practice area pages, and that advantage is now larger than it was, because assistants answering these questions are reading text and looking for a source to name.
Rule 7.1, which is the whole of it
Most of what firms worry about collapses into a single sentence. Rule 7.1 says that a lawyer shall not make a false or misleading communication about the lawyer or the lawyer's services, and that a communication is false or misleading if it contains a material misrepresentation of fact or law, or omits a fact necessary to make the statement considered as a whole not materially misleading.
The second half is the part that catches people, and it is the part that has nothing to do with lying. A true statement can breach this rule by leaving something out. A post about a seven figure verdict, with no mention that it was reduced on appeal, is not a false statement and it is very plausibly a misleading one. So is a true result presented in a way that suggests a reader can expect the same, which is why so many jurisdictions require a disclaimer on results.
| Post | Where it goes wrong | The version that does not |
|---|---|---|
| "$2.4M settlement for our client this week" | Reads as what a stranger can expect, and omits the facts that produced it | What the case turned on, with no figure and no client identifiable |
| "Best divorce attorney in the state" | A comparative claim that cannot be substantiated | What the firm does only, and how many years it has done it |
| "Injured? You have a case." | Legal advice to a person whose facts you have never seen | "Three things that decide whether there is a claim" |
| A client's story, anonymised, that is highly specific | Confidentiality. Anonymised is not the same as unidentifiable | The legal principle, with a hypothetical you invented |
| "We win 98% of our cases" | A statistic a reader cannot check and you would struggle to define | The process, described so a reader can see the work |
What solicitation actually means
This is where the folklore does the most damage. A great many lawyers believe that posting about a case type is soliciting, and the official Comment to Rule 7.3 says the opposite in plain terms: a lawyer's communication is not a solicitation if it is directed to the general public, such as through a billboard, an internet banner advertisement, a website or a television commercial, or if it is in response to a request for information.
A public post on a firm's own page is directed to the general public. It is the billboard, not the phone call. What the rule actually restricts is live person-to-person contact, and the Comment defines that too.
Such person-to-person contact does not include chat rooms, text messages or other written communications that recipients may easily disregard.
That is Comment 2 to Rule 7.3. A direct message sits on the written side of that line under the Model Rule, because the recipient can ignore it and take time to think, which is the whole basis of the distinction. Two things follow immediately, and the second matters more than the first. Your jurisdiction may not have adopted this language, so check. And a message that is permitted can still breach Rule 7.1 in every word, still counts as coercion or harassment if it persists, and is still prohibited if the person has told you they do not want to be contacted.
Confidentiality is the risk nobody plans for
Advertising rules get the attention and confidentiality causes the incidents. The failure is almost never a lawyer naming a client. It is a lawyer describing a matter so specifically that anyone involved in it can tell exactly which case it is, which in a small jurisdiction is a large number of people.
The test that survives contact with reality is not "did I use a name". It is whether the other side, the client's employer or the client's family would recognise the matter from the post. A dispute over a boundary wall on a specific street, with the month it started, is identifying even with every name removed. This is also why hypotheticals are worth the small effort of inventing: a made up fact pattern illustrates the principle exactly as well and identifies nobody.
The posts that fit comfortably inside the rules
Everything above is a constraint on claims about you and about outcomes. Notice what it does not constrain: explaining the law. That is most of what a prospective client wants and all of what a search engine and an assistant can use.
- The question as it is actually typed. "Can my employer change my contract without asking" is a post. "Variation of contractual terms" is a practice area page nobody searches for. The general argument for this is in social media SEO for small business, and it applies with more force here than anywhere.
- The deadline. Limitation periods, filing windows, notice requirements. Concrete, checkable, and the single most saved thing a firm publishes.
- The first step. What actually happens on day one of a matter like this. People delay calling a lawyer because the process is opaque, not because the fee is high.
- The correction. One thing people believe that is not true. These travel, and they demonstrate expertise more convincingly than any claim about expertise could.
- The document. What a form is, what a clause does, why one paragraph of a lease matters. Photograph it, explain it, publish it.
- The change in the law, on the day it changes, in plain words. This is the one where being fast is worth more than being polished.
Testimonials, reviews and the two rulebooks
Client testimonials are governed twice. Your bar rule governs them as communications about your services, which means a testimonial cannot say something you could not say yourself, and many jurisdictions require a disclaimer where a result is mentioned. Consumer protection law governs them as endorsements, which is a separate obligation that firms routinely miss because it does not come from the bar.
The FTC's guidance is worth reading directly rather than in summary. It is written in plain English, it uses examples, and it is explicit that a material connection a reader would not expect has to be disclosed clearly and conspicuously. It also warns that relying on a platform's own paid partnership toggle is not automatically sufficient, which is the assumption most people are quietly making.
- Get informed written consent before a client appears in anything, including a review you did not solicit but want to reshare.
- Never let a testimonial carry a claim you could not make in your own voice. The rule follows the claim, not the speaker.
- Check your own jurisdiction on disclaimers. Some require specific wording whenever a past result is mentioned at all.
- Do not give anything of value for a recommendation, and disclose any connection that is not obvious.
Where firms should actually be
For commercial and business facing practices, LinkedIn, and it is not close. The person instructing you keeps a profile there for reasons unrelated to you, which means you are reaching them in a professional frame of mind. How the platform's ranking behaves in 2026 is worth ten minutes if you are going to commit to it.
For consumer facing practices, family, immigration, personal injury, employment, the answer is wherever the fear is being typed, which increasingly means video search on TikTok and Instagram. This is uncomfortable for a lot of firms and the discomfort is worth pushing through, because the questions are being asked there whether or not a lawyer answers them. If the format is the obstacle rather than the willingness, prompts for short video will get you past the first three.
What this does not fix
Publishing does not shorten the buying cycle for legal work, it lengthens the number of people who know you exist before they need you. That is genuinely valuable and it is slow. A firm that starts posting because this quarter was quiet is going to conclude, correctly, that it did not work this quarter.
It also does not replace the referral network, and any article implying otherwise is selling something. What it does is make you the name somebody can find again after a referral, which is a smaller claim and a true one. If you are weighing the cost of doing this in house against an agency, our numbers on what social media management costs are the starting point.
The short version
- Read your own jurisdiction's rule once, properly. It is shorter than the folklore about it.
- Publishing to the public is not solicitation, and the Comment to Rule 7.3 says so.
- Describe the law and the process. Never predict a reader's outcome.
- Assume a fact pattern identifies somebody, and invent hypotheticals instead.
- Answer questions in the words a frightened person types them.
- Get written consent before any client appears, and disclose connections in testimonials.
Frequently asked questions
Can lawyers advertise on social media?
Yes. Lawyer advertising has been permitted for decades and social media is treated as another channel for it. What is regulated is the content: Model Rule 7.1 prohibits false or misleading communications, including true statements that omit a fact necessary to stop the whole thing being misleading. Your own jurisdiction's version of the rule governs you.
Is posting about a case type on social media solicitation?
No, not when it is directed at the general public. The official Comment to Model Rule 7.3 states that a communication is not a solicitation if it is directed to the general public, giving a billboard, an internet banner advertisement, a website and a television commercial as examples. A public post on the firm's own page sits in that group.
Can a lawyer send a direct message to a potential client?
Under the Model Rule's definition, a written message is not live person-to-person contact, because the Comment excludes chat rooms, text messages and other written communications that a recipient can easily disregard. That is not permission to cold message people. Rule 7.1 applies to every word, harassment and persistence are separately prohibited, and your jurisdiction may have adopted different wording.
Can law firms post client testimonials?
It depends on your jurisdiction, and two rulebooks apply at once. A testimonial cannot make a claim you could not make yourself, many jurisdictions require a disclaimer where a past result is mentioned, and the FTC's endorsement guides separately require disclosure of any connection a reader would not expect. Get informed written consent first, always.
Can a lawyer post about a case they worked on?
Carefully, and confidentiality is the binding constraint rather than the advertising rules. The test is not whether you used a name but whether the parties, an employer or a family member would recognise the matter. A specific fact pattern usually identifies somebody. Inventing a hypothetical illustrates the same principle and identifies nobody.
What should a law firm post on social media?
Questions in the words clients actually type, deadlines and limitation periods, what happens on day one of a matter, corrections of common misunderstandings, explanations of documents and clauses, and changes in the law on the day they land. None of those makes a claim about a result, which is what keeps them comfortably inside the rules.
Which platform is best for law firms?
LinkedIn for commercial and business facing practices, because the person instructing you already maintains a profile there. For consumer facing work such as family, immigration, employment and personal injury, the questions are being typed into TikTok and Instagram search, so that is where answering them reaches people.
Do I have to label social media posts as attorney advertising?
In some jurisdictions, yes, and the requirements differ in wording and in what triggers them. This is one of the places where states diverge most from the Model Rules, so read your own bar's advertising rule rather than a national summary. It is a short read and it is the version that governs you.
Can a law firm use AI to write social media posts?
For drafting, yes. For publishing without review, no. The professional obligations sit with the lawyer and do not transfer to a vendor, so a qualified person reads every post before it goes out. That review is also the step that catches the confidentiality problem a tool has no way of seeing.
How long does social media take to bring in legal work?
Months, and the mechanism is not what most firms expect. Publishing rarely produces an instruction directly. It makes you the name somebody can find again when the need arrives or when a friend gives them your name. A firm that starts because this quarter was quiet will conclude it did not work, and will be right about this quarter.
How we researched this
- Every rule quoted here is the ABA Model Rule, read from the ABA's own site on 13 August 2026 and linked below. The Model Rules are a model. They are not binding anywhere until a jurisdiction adopts them, and jurisdictions have adopted them with real differences, particularly around testimonials, disclaimers and what has to be labelled as advertising. Your own state bar's rule is the one that governs you, and this article is not legal advice.
- We have quoted Rule 7.3 together with its official Comment rather than on its own. The Comment carries the definition of live person-to-person contact, which is the part that determines what a direct message is, and reading the rule without it is how firms end up with the wrong answer about messaging.
- The claim that legal content is unusually well suited to search is ours, and it comes from what these firms already have: a set of questions people type into search engines in a frightened, badly phrased way, which nobody in the firm has ever written down.
- We sell a tool that drafts social posts. That interest is disclosed where it becomes relevant.
Sources
