Content Automation is Not a "Posting Bot"
When content automation is done poorly, it feels like spam. When it is done well, it is a reliable process with approval. The difference is not in the technology, but in the preparation.
The Problem with "Just More Content"
A law firm starts with content automation. After 3 months: 50 posts, little engagement, no clients from it. What happened?
Symptom 1: No Topic Focus
"We post about whatever seems relevant." → No recognition, no expertise perception.
Symptom 2: No Approval
"The AI will get it right." → Embarrassing errors, wrong statements, reputation risk.
Symptom 3: No Quality Criteria
"As long as we post regularly." → Generic content that sounds like everyone else.
Is Content Automation Worth It for You? (3 Questions)
Question 1: Do You Have 6-12 Topics That Actually Lead to Clients?
Not "interesting topics", but topics where clients actively seek help.
Good Topics:
- Employment law: Unfair dismissal, severance, settlement agreements
- Family law: Divorce, maintenance, child custody
- Corporate law: Formation, shareholder disputes, succession
Bad Topics:
- "Legal news of the week"
- "Interesting court decisions"
- "What does the new law mean?"
Test: If you read the article – would someone call afterward?
Question 2: Is There an Approval Process?
For law firms, approval is mandatory. Without approval, it becomes risky.
What Must Be Checked:
- Tone (fits the firm?)
- Statements (factually correct?)
- Examples (no recognizable clients?)
- Promises (no guarantees?)
Time Required: 10-15 minutes per article, when well prepared.
Question 3: Can You Define Quality?
Quality is not "well written", but measurable.
Quality Criteria for Law Firm Content:
| Criterion | Good | Bad |
|---|---|---|
| Target Audience | Clear persona (CEO with employment issue) | Everyone who needs legal help |
| Structure | Problem → Solution → Next step | Info dump without action |
| Statements | Factual, with caveats | Promises, guarantees |
| CTA | Specific (book consultation) | Generic (contact us) |
When You Should NOT Automate (Yet)
❌ No Automation If:
No Topic System Exists
You post "whatever seems important". Without a system, automation is just more of the wrong thing.Nobody Has Time for Approval
10 minutes per article. If that is not possible, content marketing is the wrong instrument.AI is Expected to "Advise"
AI can support, but not provide legal advice. Responsibility remains with humans.No Measurement is Planned
Without measurement, no learning. Which topics work? Where do inquiries come from?
Minimal Setup That Works
1. Topic Rotation (8-12 Topics)
Define 8-12 core topics that rotate. Each topic has:
- Core question (what does the audience want to know?)
- Variants (FAQ, checklist, mistakes to avoid, case study)
- Seasonality (when particularly relevant?)
2. Content Formats (4 Types)
| Format | Purpose | Frequency |
|---|---|---|
| FAQ | Answer common questions | 2x/month |
| Checklist | Practical value | 1x/month |
| Mistakes to Avoid | Problem awareness | 1x/month |
| Mini Case | Social proof (anonymized) | 1x/month |
3. Draft Creation (AI-Supported)
- Briefing with topic + format + target audience
- AI creates draft
- Human checks facts + tone
- Final approval
4. Approval Process (1 Person, 10 Minutes)
Approval Checklist:
☐ Factually correct?
☐ Tone fits the firm?
☐ No recognizable clients?
☐ No promises/guarantees?
☐ CTA present and appropriate?
5. Publishing + Repurposing
One article → multiple channels:
- Blog (detailed)
- Newsletter (shortened)
- LinkedIn (teaser + link)
- Twitter/X (if relevant)
KPIs for Content Automation
| KPI | Target | Warning Sign |
|---|---|---|
| Articles/Month | 4-8 | <2 or >12 |
| Approval Time | <15 min | >30 min |
| Engagement | Upward trend | Consistently low |
| Inquiries from Content | Measurable | No attribution |
Next Step
Answer the 3 questions honestly. If all Yes: Content automation makes sense. If one is No: First build the foundations.