Think Like an Editor: What Law Firm Marketers Can Learn From Journalists

A Recap of Key Insights From Reputation Ink’s Panel at the Legal Marketing Association Annual Conference

I returned last week from the Legal Marketing Association’s annual conference, where Reputation Ink led a panel discussion on a question most law firm marketers don’t ask often enough: What can we learn from journalists and editors about creating content people actually want to read?

Moderated by my colleague Raychel Lean, the session brought together a group of journalists and communications professionals who see, every day, what gets published, what gets read and what gets ignored:

• Robert Ambrogi, lawyer and legal journalist, LawSites
• Ellen Jones, Senior Editor, Expert Analysis at Law360
• Samantha Joseph, Co-Head of the Litigation Desk, ALM
• Elaine Walker, Director of Media Relations & Communications, Greenberg Traurig

Together, they offered a behind-the-scenes look at how stories are evaluated — and why so much law firm content never makes it past an editor’s inbox or a reader’s attention span.

Law firms are producing more content than ever: client alerts, bylined articles, press releases, award submissions, LinkedIn posts, blogs and more. At the same time, audiences are overwhelmed, attention spans are shrinking, and AI has made it easier than ever to produce content that sounds polished but says very little. The result is more content with less impact. What followed was a clear set of principles for law firm marketers to apply.

The first question should always be: Why should anyone care?

Most law firm content is ineffective because it answers the wrong question.

Journalists are trained to think about the audience first. Every story decision starts with a version of the same question: why does this matter to the reader?

That sounds obvious, but it is where a lot of law firm content breaks down.

Too often, firms begin with what they want to announce rather than what the audience needs to know. An attorney won an award. A firm launched a practice group. A client alert summarizes a new regulation. A partner wants to publish a bylined article on a broad industry topic. None of those things is automatically compelling on its own.

What makes them compelling is relevance.

The most effective content does not stop at what happened. It quickly answers the next question: So what? Why does this matter now? What is the impact? Who is affected? What should the reader understand or do differently because of it?

In practice, that often means anchoring your idea to something tangible — a new law, a recent decision, a regulatory shift — and then clearly articulating the downstream impact on clients, businesses or industries.

If you bury the point, you lose the reader

Attorneys are trained to build to a conclusion. That works in a legal brief. It does not work in marketing content. Most readers are not approaching a bylined article or client alert with the patience of a judge.

If the most important takeaway is buried near the end, many readers will never see it.

Data backs this up. Editors are looking at metrics that show how long readers actually spend on an article — and in many cases, it is measured in seconds, not minutes. If your core message is not immediately clear, it may never be seen.

If your pitch, article or alert does not make the value clear right away, it may not get opened, read or placed. In a crowded media and content landscape, marketers have to help attorneys get to the point faster without sacrificing substance.

That means elevating the takeaway, sharpening the headline, clarifying the angle and making the practical implications visible immediately.

A broad topic is not a story

“AI,” “tariffs,” “regulation” and “compliance” are not story ideas. They are starting points.

Editors are not looking for vague pitches about industry themes in the abstract. They are looking for something timely and concrete that creates a reason to care now. A new law. A recent ruling. A government action. A deadline. A tangible market shift.

In some cases, that window is surprisingly narrow. At Law360, Ellen Jones shared that they use a 90-day rule — if nothing meaningful has happened on a topic in the past three months, it becomes much harder to justify running the story now.

It is not enough to know that an attorney has expertise in an area. You have to connect that expertise to something current and specific.

This matters not only for media pitching but also for thought leadership planning. Broad evergreen themes have a place, but the strongest content sits at the intersection of expertise and immediacy.

If your content doesn’t add insight, it adds no value

Legal audiences are sophisticated. They do not need firms to repeat information they can find elsewhere. In many cases, they have already read it.

Content that simply summarizes a regulation or rehashes a legal update does not stand out. What resonates is perspective, interpretation and practical guidance.

In fact, much of the content that performs best is what editors often think of as “day two” coverage — not breaking the news itself, but explaining what it actually means and what readers should do next.

The best bylined content does more than explain what happened. It answers questions like:

• What do I need to do differently tomorrow?
• What risk should I be paying attention to?
• What does this mean for my business?

If a piece could have been produced by anyone with access to a news summary and a prompt, it is probably not strong enough. The content that stands out reflects genuine expertise, a clear point of view and an understanding of what readers are worried about.

“We can’t talk about it” is usually not the end of the story

Confidentiality is often where content ideas stall out.

Attorneys may say they cannot talk about a case, a deal or a client matter, and sometimes that ends the conversation. But even when specifics are off-limits, there is often a broader story worth telling.

A confidential matter may reveal a larger litigation pattern. A deal may point to shifting activity in a sector. A client issue may signal a broader business risk that others should be preparing for.

Even when direct commentary is limited, there are ways to contribute. Providing background, directing reporters to public filings, or helping them understand key documents can ensure your perspective is represented — rather than leaving the narrative to the other side.

If you only reach out when you need something, you’re already behind

Relationships are not about collecting contacts. They are about being useful.

Editors and reporters are overwhelmed with pitches, but they remember the people who understand what they cover, respect their time and consistently bring them relevant ideas.

That includes knowing what not to send. One of the quickest ways to lose credibility is to blast out untargeted pitches that clearly do not align with a reporter’s beat. The opposite is also true — when someone consistently sends thoughtful, relevant ideas, their emails get opened.

A strong relationship will not make a weak story newsworthy. But it will influence whether your email gets opened, whether your idea gets considered and whether your source is remembered the next time a story comes up.

It also changes how people respond when you reach out. If you have been helpful in the past — offering context, sharing sources, pointing someone in the right direction — that goodwill carries forward.

A press release is not a strategy

Press releases have a role. They are just not the default solution for everything.

A generic release written in marketing language is rarely the best way to get an editor’s attention. It often feels mass-produced and disconnected from what the reporter actually covers.

Editors consistently prefer a short, direct email that explains why the story matters to them and their audience over a long, formal release.

Many attorneys still equate visibility with a press release. But a release may not be the right vehicle. Depending on the goal, a better approach may be a bylined article, a source introduction, a targeted pitch, a LinkedIn post, a client email or a coordinated campaign across channels.

If you’re just executing requests, you’re not doing your job

Law firm marketers are not just order-takers. We are advisors.

That means having the confidence to tell an attorney when something is unlikely to land as-is. It means asking better questions: What is the real goal? Who are you trying to reach? What outcome are you hoping for?

It means reframing ideas instead of rejecting them outright. Your job isn’t to say yes. Your job is to improve the outcome. That is not always easy, especially in law firm environments where hierarchy and personalities can complicate things. But it is where strong marketing teams distinguish themselves.

Editorial thinking is the advantage most firms are missing

The goal is not to turn law firm marketers into journalists. It is to apply editorial discipline to marketing.

When we think more carefully about audience, newsworthiness, timing, structure, relevance and relationships, our content improves. Our pitches get sharper. Our thought leadership becomes more distinctive.

AI can help firms produce more content, but it cannot replace judgment. If we bring more editorial thinking into how we plan, shape and promote content, we will not just create more visibility. We will create communications that are more useful, more credible and more likely to earn attention.

Put this into practice

If you’re serious about improving your firm’s content, don’t let this stay theoretical. Take these ideas and apply them to what you’re working on right now.

We’ve created a set of tools from this session to help you do exactly that — including an editorial checklist and practical frameworks you can use immediately with your team to evaluate pitches, bylined articles and client alerts.

And if you want to hear the full discussion, the Legal Marketing Association typically releases session recordings for purchase about a month after the conference. This one is worth your time if you want to sharpen your approach to content, media and thought leadership.