Company program: a monthly search and publishing program
Starting at $2,750/month, plus setup fee
Criminal defense needs direct contact. Injury content supports screening; employment pages name the represented side; immigration separates employer and family pathways. The partner confirms practice fit. Intake controls personal details, and attorneys review every released version.
Illustrative queries: 'first court appearance after arrest' and 'criminal defense lawyer in my county'. Offer direct intake access; listening must not be a prerequisite to contact.
Illustrative queries: 'what to bring to an injury lawyer consultation' and 'personal injury lawyer fees and costs'. Explain preparation and actual fees without predicting compensation.
'Employment lawyer severance review' and 'employer response to discrimination complaint' serve different buyers. Specify employee-side, employer-side or both before commissioning.
'Employment based immigration lawyer for employers' and 'documents for employer sponsored immigration consultation' need different next steps. Identify who the firm represents and date agency-procedure discussions.
An episode serves someone researching a process; the linked practice page explains fit, credentials and consultation access. Give people choosing counsel now a direct contact route. State actual consultation costs and availability.
Proposed episode passage, not a recording
Ask intake which documents the attorney needs and how to submit them. If your letter names a response date, mention it when arranging the consultation. Keep the agreement and employment details out of public comments.
Fictional Florida severance brief and report. No client engagement, finished episode or legal outcome is claimed.
Illustrative companion page, not client work or results
Illustrative employee-side Florida example. Attorney review required before use; not legal advice.
Keep confidential documents and employment facts out of public forms. Ask the firm how to arrange the consultation.
The brief in short: Audience: a Florida employee considering a severance review. Buyer question: 'What should I prepare before speaking to a lawyer?' Search intent: consultation preparation.[8][5]
The editorial decision: The proposed checklist also makes the consultation fee, attending attorney and intake route clear. It prepares a meeting without telling the reader whether to sign. names the audience and jurisdiction, then bounds the answer before practical guidance.
A company program focuses on the matters and clients one firm wants to attract. Enterprise coordinates a larger practice or office network. Your attorneys supply judgment and approval; we manage search, production and the upkeep of your public answers.
Is this the right fit for your team?
Before publication.
Checks law, jurisdiction and the education/advice boundary.Before publication.
Checks credentials, confidentiality, channels and required filings.Before publication.
Verifies fees, contact facts and controlled handoff.Before publication.
Prepares sources, final formats and approval records.Employers and individuals need different answers. State the represented side, accepted work and actual intake route.
General content can imply an individual recommendation. Attorneys check jurisdiction and the meaning of each finished format.
Busy intake can conceal poor fit. Separate suitable enquiries, attended consultations and accepted engagements; keep personal facts with the firm.
Choose one accepted matter type. Build the page around who the firm represents, what the first meeting covers and how to prepare for it.
Draft preparation and fee explanations with verified intake facts.
Attorneys review meaning; the advertising reviewer clears final formats.
Review aggregate fit and update dated guidance.
Choose the question and establish a baseline.
WorkHacker: Map search questions and existing pages into a podcast-led plan.
Your team: Confirm desired matters, exclusions, jurisdictions, credentials and reviewer.
Partner clears the brief and review rules.
Flag disputed interpretations and dated authorities.
WorkHacker: Draft from public sources and approved subject input.
Your team: Resolve legal questions and consolidate corrections.
Practice attorney clears every script and article.
Check terminology and spoken qualifications.
WorkHacker: Produce the agreed outputs and check quality and disclosures.
Your team: Review final audio and supporting pieces; confirm voice permissions.
Attorney clears finished pieces; meaning changes return for review.
Schedule around required filings, not just production completion.
WorkHacker: Keep dated approvals and check release destinations.
Your team: Complete required filings and clear contact wording.
Firm clears the exact package and release date.
Use aggregate feedback to set the next priority.
WorkHacker: Review agreed measures and propose library updates.
Your team: Report consultation stages and legal or service changes.
Attorney clears substantive updates; partner clears scope changes.
Rule 7.1 bars false or misleading communications; Rule 7.2 covers recommendation payments, certification claims and responsible-lawyer identification; Rule 7.3 restricts solicitation. The firm's adopted jurisdiction rules govern, and a general disclaimer does not cure every misleading claim.
ABA Model Rule 7.1: Communications Concerning a Lawyer's ServicesABA Model Rule 7.3: Solicitation of ClientsChecked 2026-10-12.
California's Chapter 7 requires responsible-lawyer or firm identification and addresses guarantees and 'no fee without recovery' claims. Florida requires filed advertisements to be submitted at least 20 days before first use; website filing exemptions do not remove substantive obligations.
State Bar of California: Rules of Professional Conduct, Chapter 7The Florida Bar: Lawyer Advertising Filing RequirementsChecked 2026-10-12.
Model Rules 1.6 and 1.18 cover client information and prospective-client consultations. Keep matter details, correspondence and intake recordings out of production; marketing receives aggregate stages, and case-specific advice stays with attorneys.
ABA Model Rule 1.6: Confidentiality of InformationABA Model Rule 1.18: Duties to Prospective ClientChecked 2026-10-12.
Practice attorneys clear every script and article, with final listening preserving spoken qualifications and clips approved separately. Shared research reduces preparation, not review obligations; a booking does not establish a viable claim or representation.
ABA Model Rule 7.1 addresses false or misleading communications. Rule 7.2 covers service communications, recommendation payments, certification claims and responsible-lawyer identification. Rule 7.3 defines solicitation directed at someone known to need services in a particular matter and restricts certain live contacts. The firm's adopted jurisdiction rules govern; model rules are a reference.
Review titles, introductions, articles, notes, artwork, clips and calls to action together. Repurposing can remove a qualification or add a misleading headline. Verify credentials and fees. A general disclaimer does not cure every misleading claim.
California's Chapter 7, effective November 1, 2018, requires responsible-lawyer or firm identification and addresses guarantees and cost disclosures alongside 'no fee without recovery' claims. Florida distinguishes website filing exemptions from advertisements requiring advance filing; substantive rules still apply. Sources checked October 12, 2026.
For a scoped Florida example, an advertisement requiring filing must be submitted at least 20 days before first use. Work backward from the proposed release: finish production and attorney approval before that filing date, then allow for compliance corrections. Do not equate the minimum interval with guaranteed clearance. The firm classifies each episode, clip, paid placement and email and confirms wording, retention and filing requirements. Federal immigration subject matter does not settle attorney advertising obligations.
ABA Model Rules 1.6 and 1.18 cover client information and prospective-client consultations; application requires the firm's judgment. Use public authorities and labeled hypothetical examples. Changing a name alone is insufficient. Keep matter details, correspondence and intake recordings out of production prompts and queues.
The firm controls intake forms, submission warnings, access and routing. Conflict checks and case-specific advice stay with its team. Marketing receives aggregate stages; allegations, immigration status, attachments and identities do not go into analytics, public comments or ordinary campaign automation.
Articles need current primary authorities, exceptions and a review date. Episodes add pronunciation checks and final listening to preserve spoken qualifications; clips need approval too. Shared research reduces preparation, not review obligations.
A settled process explanation may need less review than a multi-state comparison or agency update. Agree attorney input, jurisdictional checks and final-format approval with the firm. The calculator compares program costs with available marketing budget and collected professional-fee economics; it does not estimate attorney review time or legal outcomes.
Google's spam policies, updated August 28, 2026, address doorway pages and scaled low-value content. Plan pages around actual services, jurisdictions and distinct questions. A county-name swap across dozens of identical pages adds little. A useful page explains the firm's service there, its relevant attorneys and a working contact route. Automation should support that editorial work.
Qualified consultations
Firm intake reports aggregate consultations meeting agreed practice, geography and capacity criteria, separated into booked and attended stages.
Qualification is the firm's judgment. A booking does not establish a viable claim, a conflict-free matter or representation.
Owned concept in development, not client results.
Owned practice-area show concepts remain in development, with no available audio or client consultation results.
Case-specific advice stays with attorneys. Routing or administrative replies need approved boundaries. Wider intake automation requires separate confidentiality, access and conflict review.
Compare approved fees, setup and minimum term with planned outputs. Confirm jurisdictions, revision limits, distribution, hosting, filming and specialist review. Additional production or systems work needs agreed scope; pending allowances and rates are not commitments.
No. Competition, demand, intake and capacity affect results. Measure against a baseline; marketing measurement must not imply guaranteed legal outcomes.
What should I bring, and who will I speak to?
Podcast episode with a written preparation checklist
Attorney checks local terminology and boundaries; intake confirms the actual process.
If there is no recovery, could I still owe costs?
Article and separately approved episode
Partner verifies the firm's fee terms and required advertising qualifications.
What documents does the lawyer need before we talk?
Podcast episode and consultation-preparation article
Employment attorney checks jurisdiction and avoids a universal deadline or signing recommendation.
What should HR prepare before discussing sponsorship?
Podcast episode with a dated companion article
Immigration attorney checks current agency sources, representation boundaries and what can be discussed publicly.
Fix an unclear contact journey first. Episodes should connect to pages explaining the matters you handle and how to reach intake. A Free Search Check shows what to fix first.
Plan for subject input, a draft review and a final listen on each piece. The first cycle sets the rhythm before volume grows. Complex topics and corrections take longer, and a late approval moves the release date.
Yes, with the attorney's explicit permission and the firm's approval of each episode. Each episode says, in audio and in writing, that it is narrated by a synthetic version of the attorney's own voice, and the attorney checks pronunciation and qualifications in the final audio.
Name matters accepted, jurisdictions and the side represented. Employment content needs a clear employee or employer audience. Intake decides individual fit; content explains services without assessing a visitor's case.
State the actual consultation fee or how to confirm it before booking. Distinguish representation fees and costs. The ABA consumer guide highlights these questions; the firm's reviewer approves its fee description.
Show a firm-approved route into controlled intake and explain what to avoid submitting publicly. Do not invite detailed allegations under a podcast clip. The firm establishes confidentiality wording and handles the conversation.
Explain who conducts consultations and handles matters. A recognizable voice must not imply unavailable personal access. Intake confirms assignments; biographies and episode notes describe actual roles.
Checked .
Model-rule text. Publication date not listed. Model rules do not replace jurisdiction-specific rules.
Checked .
Model-rule text. Publication date not listed.
Checked .
Page dated April 17, 2019. Describes solicitation, live person-to-person restrictions and exceptions, and coercion or harassment.
Checked .
Effective November 1, 2018; current published text checked. Rules and comments address guarantees, fee claims, responsible-firm identification and solicitation.
Checked .
July 2026 submission guidance: required filings must be submitted at least 20 days before first use. Website filing exemptions do not remove substantive advertising obligations.
Checked .
Model-rule text. Publication date not listed. Covers representation information and reasonable safeguards.
Checked .
Page dated April 13, 2020. Duties can arise from a consultation even when no representation follows; application depends on the facts and governing rules.
Checked .
Published September 9, 2019. Consumer guidance on experience, fees, who handles the matter and comparing lawyers. It is guidance, not a current buyer-behavior survey.
Checked .
Updated August 28, 2026. Addresses substantially similar funnel pages and large amounts of low-value content made to manipulate rankings.
Rob leads search strategy and editorial direction. He has worked in search since 1995 and wrote Search and Social (Wiley, 2012). Lam builds the systems behind the work, from research to publishing. His background is software for banks and startups.
Rob separates practice, jurisdiction and audience before production. Lam maintains the approval process. Your responsible attorney clears claims, deadlines and each published adaptation.
Meet the people doing the work