Is SEO Still Worth It for Law Firms?

Google AI Overviews are changing search

It is impossible to talk about a law firm SEO strategy without mentioning AI Overviews.

For many searches, Google now displays an AI-generated answer above the traditional search results. If someone searches for a legal question, they may receive a detailed summary before they’ve clicked on a single website.

For informational searches, this is clearly affecting traffic. If Google answers a simple question directly on the results page, fewer people are likely to click through to read an article explaining exactly the same thing.

I’ve spoken to a number of law firms who have noticed this. Their analytics show reductions in certain types of traffic, particularly where articles answer straightforward legal questions. On the face of it, that sounds worrying.

However, I think it’s important to separate traffic from enquiries. Website traffic has always been a useful metric, but it has never been the metric that really matters. Law firms don’t pay the bills with page views. They pay the bills with new instructions, phone calls and qualified enquiries.

If AI reduces low-quality visits but still sends firms people who genuinely need legal advice, that isn’t necessarily a negative outcome.

We’ve already seen AI generate enquiries

This is one of the reasons I’m far more optimistic about AI search than many people seem to be. At BSD Legal Marketing, we’ve already had marketing enquiries from law firms who told us they found us after seeing one of our articles referenced within AI-generated search results.

We’ve also had conversations with clients who have received enquiries from people using AI search, or platforms, such as Chat GPT rather than carrying out a traditional Google search.

Those enquiries didn’t appear by chance. The AI didn’t invent the answers. It found information it considered trustworthy enough to reference.

That is exactly why I don’t believe AI removes the need for legal SEO. If anything, it reinforces it.

If AI systems are selecting content to answer users’ questions, then your objective becomes making sure your firm is one of the sources they trust.

That still requires high-quality content, technical optimisation, topical authority and a strong online presence.

SEO isn’t just about rankings anymore

One of the biggest mistakes I think firms make is judging SEO purely on rankings. For years, agencies have focused on moving keywords from position eight to position three. While rankings still matter, I don’t think they’re the whole story anymore.

Increasingly, firms should be asking different questions. These should include:

• Are we appearing in AI-generated answers?
• Are more people mentioning they found us through ChatGPT or Google’s AI features?
• Are we receiving better quality enquiries?
• Has our reputation improved online?
• Are we becoming recognised as a trusted source within our practice areas?

Those questions are much more relevant than simply asking whether traffic has increased by ten per cent.

In many cases, fewer visitors with stronger intent are more valuable than thousands of people looking for quick legal information.

Good SEO has always been about trust

One thing hasn’t changed. Google has spent years trying to identify trustworthy websites. AI search is trying to do exactly the same thing.

Whether somebody finds your firm through traditional search, AI Overviews or another AI platform, the systems behind them still need to decide which information is reliable enough to recommend.

This is why creating original, useful content is becoming even more important. There are already thousands of articles explaining what happens after a speeding offence or how divorce works.

The firms that will stand out are those adding practical observations, real experience and opinions rather than simply rewriting information that’s already available elsewhere.

AI appears to be rewarding expertise rather than replacing it.

Law firms need to rethink what success looks like

One of the biggest changes I think AI is bringing to SEO is that it’s forcing firms to look beyond traffic as the main measure of success. For years, agencies have proudly reported increases in organic visitors. More impressions, more clicks and more sessions were all seen as evidence that a campaign was working.

Those metrics still have value, but they no longer tell the whole story. If Google’s AI Overviews answer a straightforward legal question, it makes sense that fewer people will click through to read a 1,500-word article covering exactly the same point. That doesn’t automatically mean your law firm’s SEO is failing. It simply means the way people consume information is changing.

Instead of asking “How many visitors did we get?”, firms should also be asking “How many enquiries did we receive?”

• Did more people complete an enquiry form?
• Did more people pick up the phone?
• Did the quality of enquiries improve?

Ultimately, those are the figures that determine whether your marketing is delivering a return on investment.

Becoming a trusted source is now the goal

I think one of the biggest misconceptions about AI search is that it somehow replaces SEO. It doesn’t.

AI still needs somewhere to get its information from.

Whether it’s Google’s AI Overviews, ChatGPT, Perplexity or another platform, these systems are analysing content from websites they consider reliable. If your firm isn’t publishing useful content and demonstrating expertise, it becomes much harder to be referenced.

This is where topical authority becomes incredibly important.

If you’re a firm specialising in personal injury, criminal defence or family law, your website shouldn’t contain one or two articles on those subjects. It should demonstrate genuine depth.

That means answering the questions clients are actually asking, covering developments in the law, sharing practical insight and building a library of content that positions your firm as a high authority source. This has always been good SEO and AI is simply reinforcing it.

SEO is much more than writing articles

One thing that has frustrated me for years is the assumption that SEO simply means publishing more content. Content is important, but it is only one part of a successful law firm SEO strategy.

• Technical optimisation still matters.
• Website speed still matters.
• Internal linking still matters.
• The structure of your law firm’s website still matters.

Clear navigation, fast loading pages and a good user experience all influence how search engines understand and rank your website. They also influence whether visitors stay on your site long enough to make an enquiry.

Even elements such as meta descriptions still have a role to play. Whilst they may be less influential where AI summaries dominate the search results, they continue to affect click-through rates for traditional listings and remain an important part of good optimisation.

The fundamentals haven’t disappeared; they have simply become part of a much bigger picture.

SEO doesn’t work in isolation

I also think firms sometimes expect SEO to do everything on its own. In reality, the strongest results usually come when SEO forms part of a wider digital marketing strategy.

Good content can be shared across social media, used within email marketing, repurposed into videos and referenced in newsletters. One well-written article can support multiple marketing channels if it’s planned properly.

Equally, firms shouldn’t overlook the value of brand building. If somebody sees your article in Google today, a LinkedIn post next week and hears your solicitor speak on a podcast a month later, you’re building familiarity and trust long before they need legal advice. This is much more powerful than relying on one channel alone.

Not all SEO agencies are adapting

This is probably where firms need to be careful. Some SEO agencies are still working as though nothing has changed. They’re producing large volumes of generic content, chasing rankings for every possible keyword and reporting success based purely on traffic graphs.

That approach is becoming increasingly outdated. The agencies that will deliver the best results over the next few years are the ones adapting to how people actually search.

That means thinking about AI search as well as Google. It means writing original content rather than publishing variations of the same article hundreds of other firms already have. It means focusing on expertise, authority and trust rather than simply keyword density. Most importantly, it means understanding that search is evolving rather than disappearing.

How BSD Legal Marketing can assist

At BSD Legal Marketing, we don’t see AI as a threat to SEO. We see it as the next stage in its evolution.

Our approach combines traditional search engine optimisation (SEO) with an understanding of how AI search is changing user behaviour. We create original content that reflects your firm’s expertise, optimise websites from both a technical and user experience perspective, and develop long-term SEO strategies designed to improve visibility across traditional search engines and AI-powered search platforms.

That includes identifying relevant keywords, improving technical performance, strengthening internal linking, reviewing conversion rates and helping firms build genuine authority within their practice areas.

Our objective has never been to generate traffic for the sake of it. It’s to help law firms generate better enquiries, improve their online visibility and grow sustainably.

SEO isn’t dead. It’s evolving.

Every few years someone announces that SEO is finished. First it was social media. Then voice search and now it’s AI. The reality is that search has always evolved, and good marketers have evolved with it. I don’t think AI is replacing SEO, but it is changing what good SEO looks like.

The firms that continue publishing thoughtful, original content, invest in their websites and build genuine authority will still be the firms that people find, whether that’s through Google, AI search or whatever comes next.

The way people search is changing, but one thing hasn’t.

If your firm wants to be recommended, it still needs to earn that recommendation.