Frankly, I was a little surprised at this article, because: (1) it's the 21st century; and (2) when I get a call from a new client or a lawyer referring me work, the first thing I do is google them. Sometimes, I run the searches while I am talking to them on the phone.
Why? Because, as a lawyer, you are an extension of the client. A quick google search reveals their business page, news stories about them, and a general sense of "who they are." By hiring you, a client asks you to advocate for their position. Wouldn't it be relevant to see who it is that you're going to stake some part of your professional reputation on?
Let's be honest, the number # 1 test for a prospective client is "Is this a Crazy Person?" (Closely followed by: "Can this client pay my fees?")
Once you represent them, it'd be malpractice not to have googled the client. What if the client was making statements online (or posting videos or photos) that have a direct bearing on their case? If you don't find it, you can be sure that opposing counsel will.
Speaking of which, don't think for a second that I don't google opposing counsel and/or opposing parties. In fact, one of the best items a creditor can obtain on a credit application is an e-mail address, which I've called the 21st century fingerprint. Google, Facebook, Linkedin, and Twitter are all fair game.
What a strange article for the American Bar Association. I'm going to google the author now.