Law firms investing in AI search visibility are largely solving the wrong problem, according to digital strategist Josh Anisfeld of Baretz+Brunelle.
Anisfeld, writing in Above the Law, argues that AI visibility is typically treated as a content problem, but that framing only addresses a fraction of what firms actually face.
In reality, firms must navigate three separate paths that legal service buyers travel when using AI-powered search tools to find and evaluate counsel.
The first path concerns discovery, specifically how a firm gets onto a buyer’s shortlist in the first place, which involves content and website optimisation strategies.
However, Anisfeld is clear that this first path accounts for only a third of the overall challenge, meaning the majority of the problem lies elsewhere.
The second path concerns external reputation and how firms earn validation from sources outside their own websites and owned media channels.
Rankings, legal directories, and earned media all play a significant role here, with Anisfeld noting these assets should be treated as ongoing reputation investments rather than annual administrative tasks.
AI engines frequently rely on outside validation when deciding which firms or lawyers belong in a recommendation, meaning commentary in respected publications can carry more weight than self-published content.
Marketing teams can coordinate this effort, but Anisfeld is clear that it requires sustained participation from the lawyers and practice groups a firm wants the market to recognise.
The third path begins after a buyer already has a specific name in mind, whether that is a lawyer, a practice group, or the firm itself, and shifts the AI engine’s role from shortlisting to scrutiny.
At this stage, the engine is no longer building a list of options but is instead checking whether the option already in front of the buyer holds up under closer examination.
This due diligence phase represents a fundamentally different challenge from discovery, requiring firms to ensure their reputational record is consistent and credible across multiple external sources.
Firms that focus exclusively on content optimisation risk performing well in the first path while quietly failing in the second and third, leaving them visible but ultimately unconvincing to buyers.
Anisfeld’s framework suggests that a genuinely effective AI visibility strategy must treat all three paths as distinct workstreams, each requiring different tactics, timelines, and levels of lawyer involvement.