Talk:Richard Berman (lawyer)

message: There was a lot of unsourced criticism in this article, so I've removed it. Anyone wanting to re-insert it should make sure that it is sourced very carefully, and that give full citations are given. See WP:BLP. Many thanks, SlimVirgin (talk) 17:07, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Unsourced criticism

message: CBS's 60 Minutes did a story on Berman this past Sunday (4/9) and so I provided a link to that (with video as well).
:And this is a PDF rebuttal to the 'stories' Berman told in that interview. Exit2DOS2000•T•C• 22:28, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: 60 Minutes Story

message: This article has been edited anonymously by Berman and Company, who are lobbyists for amongst others the American Beverage Institute, the Center for Consumer Freedom, the Center for Union Facts and the Employment Policies Institute.
Boo Hooo. Quit your cryin'! He may represent some people that do things others don't like, but he tries to protect the free market and not allow the nannie government that is growing ever stronger to control and manipulate our lives; I believe people can choose for themselves what they want to eat, drink, drive, grow, etc.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.127.161.30 (talk) 03:53, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Warning: Lobbyists [[Berman and Company]] at work  

message: I've been working on edits to the page, as this page (as well as the page for Berman and Company) have been largely edited by anonymous users with IPs that trace back to the Berman and Company offices (see above Talk page entry); the article originally read almost like a P.R. release from the company, including obscure awards and quotes only mentioned on their website. Before I started working on this article, almost nothing was sourced, and there were tons of dead-end wikilinks. Just about everything I've added to the article has had a source. Some of the more outrageous criticisms of Berman have been published/aired by 60 Minutes and USA Today, both of which are notable sources and fairly unbiased. There is little positive press on Berman, other than that listed on his own websites. I understand that this is a BLP, but it is in definite need of a major cleanup. Shamrox (talk) 19:36, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: That makes sense. I've got a few other edits to try out, let's see what we come up with. Ten Thousand Bullets (talk) 20:55, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Revamping of article

message: The following was removed by an anonymous editor, without explanation:
During an interview on the Rachel Maddow show Berman claimed the minimum wage was $50,000 per year, a dubious claim as yearly pay (using Washington state's $8.55/hour) for a standard 40 hour workweek is $17,784 *before* taxes.
What Berman actually said was, 
...the average income, the average family income of a minimum wage worker today is approximately fifty thousand dollars...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/07/rachel-maddow-confronts-n_n_312334.html (second video)
It seems the removed text wasn't precise in its Berman attribution. But Berman is being deceptive as well, in that the family income shouldn't be the criteria by which we evaluate an individual's employment compensation. Imagine an employer telling a worker, "I'm going to pay you less because your family members already have jobs..."
I think perhaps this subject matter deserves to be in the article, but it needs to be more carefully presented, as well as properly sourced. Richard Myers (talk) 17:55, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  this was removed 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Richard Berman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20101205120303/http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?articleId=8984 to http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?articleId=8984
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 23:27, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Richard Berman. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050623201632/http://www.consumerfreedom.com/about.cfm to http://www.consumerfreedom.com/about.cfm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:45, 2 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: At the first, at the bottom, the description leans on words that can be considered bias in the context:
"Berman's organizations have run numerous media campaigns concerning obesity, soda taxation, smoking, cruelty to animals, mad cow disease, taxes, the national debt, drinking and driving, as well as not increasing the minimum wage. He is hired by companies to attack consumer, safety and environmental groups.[4][5][6][7]"
"Not increasing" breaks the parallelism of the list to cast Berman's stance as negative. Why not write "as well as the minimum wage" since that is how the prior issues are stated (even though the entire list borders on vague).
Also, the sources provided for "... attack consumer..." look like they are normal proceedings in United States courts. "Attack" is loaded in that it portrays Berman as going above and beyond legal fair-play to admonish these groups personally. Objectively, this does not look like the case. 
Why not:
"His company works to challenge regulations from consumer, safety and environmental groups."
?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdabs (talk • contribs) 17:10, 18 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Loaded words / phrasing