Lawfluencers
In the modern digital world, social media platforms have seen a new category of legal critics and ‘advisors’ commonly referred to as “lawfluencers”. These individuals often present legal information in an accessible and engaging short-form video or post, having the effect of increasing public awareness of legal issues. However, while content in this form may serve an educational function, reliance on lawfluencers for complex legal matters (particularly succession planning and estate litigation) raises significant issues. Despite their popularity, lawfluencers are an inadequate substitute for the provision of tailored advice by qualified legal practitioners due to generalisation and lack of accuracy, accountability and professional responsibility.
Over Simplification
Succession planning and estate litigation are highly fact-specific areas of law, requiring careful consideration of an individual’s financial circumstances, familial relationships and long-term objectives. Social media content, by contrast, is generally broad and overly-simplified, by necessity, in order to appeal to a wide audience. As a result, the advice provided by lawfluencers often fails to account for the nuanced differences in individual circumstances. This risks individuals adopting strategies not suited to their personal circumstances and therefore undermining the effectiveness of undertaking estate planning at all.
Qualifications
A further concern is the level of accuracy and depth of legal knowledge provided by these lawfluencers. Unfortunately, the rise of the digital age has made it easier for people to purport to be experts in any area without having to provide any evidence as to qualifications. Not all lawfluencers possess formal legal qualifications and even those who do may lack expertise in specialised areas such as trusts and estates or lack knowledge in a specific jurisdiction relevant to a consumer who is viewing their content.
Appropriateness of Advice
Lawfluencers often produce content for a broad or international audience, without adequately distinguishing between differing legal systems and jurisdictions. Consequently, advice that is valid in one jurisdiction may be inapplicable or even misleading in another. In contrast, qualified legal practitioners are trained to interpret and apply the relevant law with precision, ensuring that advice is both accurate and contextually appropriate.
Competence and Ethics
The distinction between lawfluencers and legal professionals is further underscored by the ethical and professional obligations placed on qualified legal professionals. Lawyers are bound by rigid regulatory frameworks that impose (non-exhaustively) duties of competence, confidentiality and loyalty to clients. These obligations are enforceable through professional disciplinary bodies which provide an additional layer of protection to clients. Where legal advice obtained from a qualified legal professional proves negligent or incorrect, clients typically have access to remedies through professional liability regimes. By contrast, individuals who rely on informal advice from lawfluencers generally lack meaningful avenues of recourse if that advice results in adverse outcomes because lawfluencers operate outside of these formal structures.
Click Bait
As a result of the sheer volume of digital information, social media favours short, ‘click-bait’ style videos and posts to peak audience interest. This provides incentive for lawfluencers to oversimplify or sensationalise legal information to increase their social media engagement, leading to the prioritisation of appeal and engagement over accuracy and relevance. While simplification is not inherently problematic, it becomes so when it distorts legal principals and or omits critical qualifications. In the context of estate law, where errors can have substantial financial, taxation and other legal consequences, the risks of misinformation are particularly severe.
Compliance
Succession planning and estate administration and litigation frequently involve the preparation of specific and legally binding documents, compliance with procedural and Court requirements and, in some cases, court appearances. Lawfluencers (due to their general nature, digital presence only and broad reach) cannot perform these tailored functions, regardless of their level of knowledge or experience. Reliance on informal advice given by lawfluencers may therefore leave individuals at risk when attempting to navigate the formal legal processes required to protect their rights or give effect to their intentions.
In conclusion, while lawfluencers contribute to the accessibility of legal information, their practicality is limited in the context of complex legal matters such as succession planning and estate administration and litigation. The generalised nature of their advice and the concerns regarding accuracy, accountability and professional standards, makes lawfluencers an unreliable source for legal advice. Individuals seeking advice on such matters should engage qualified legal practitioners who can provide tailored, accurate and ethically grounded advice.
If you wish to speak with a lawyer about any issue in the area of trusts, wills and estates you may be faced with, please reach out to our experienced team today by contacting de Groots 1800 408 766.
Read More on:
NSW Clarifies Use of AI in Court Proceedings
What Happens to Your Social Media Accounts When You Die?
Securing Your Digital Legacy: Smart Estate Planning for Online Assets
The Digital Age – It’s not all Smooth Sailing
Connect with us on LinkedIn
