Talk:Richard Berman (lawyer)

Untitled
This page is very obviously biased and looks to be copied from some outside source. I don't have the knowledge / motivation to edit it.Zufall 03:22, 6 January 2006 (UTC)

Clearly the writer has missed the point of an online encyclopedia by presenting heavily-skewed factual information coupled with (very obvious) biased-opinions. It's writers like this one that will help destroy 'open-source' initiatives like this site. Very disappointing. Afstorm 01:34, 2 Febuary 2006 (EST)


 * Ok - Thanks for the tip Afstorm 01:347, 4 March 2006 (EST)


 * Tried to edit out the bias, wikify and cleanup TreveXtalk 15:43, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Unsourced criticism
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)

Melanie Sloan's allegations
Melanie Sloan of CREW on Al Franken's radio show of 6/27/06 has alleged that Berman's 501(c)(3) organizations are front organizations funded by corporations as a PR campaign, and providing income only to Berman.

60 Minutes Story
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)

Musician David Berman, son
I believe it should be mentioned that Richard's son, David Berman (singer) should be referenced in this article. He is a rather famous relative. Though I find no specific sources Identifying him directly as his father, this interview with Pitchfork (http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/article/feature/31330-interview-silver-jews) shows that David's father lived in Houston at the same time as Richard. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcas (talk • contribs) 18:15, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

With all due respect, I don't think the interview, which never mentions Richard Berman, suffices for such a claim. I couldn't find anything on the net corroborating it. Do you mind if I revert it until you can find substantive evidence? 1337wesm (talk) 19:02, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

Here is citable evidence:

http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/article/news/148664-silver-jews-david-berman-calls-it-quits

http://www.dragcity.com/dcforums/viewtopic.php?t=649&start=0&postdays=0&postorder=asc&highlight=&sid=fd4fe48765af882d3a0dbbe4bf1c5984

http://www.avclub.com/articles/david-berman-ends-silver-jews-and-outs-his-dad-as,23014/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by Juices Main Man (talk • contribs) 22:14, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

http://welistenforyou.blogspot.com/2009/01/silver-jews-are-done.html

User:greatrayray 2:06, 23 January 2009 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.146.80.2 (talk)


 * More here:
 * Deepred6502 (talk) 08:18, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Deepred6502 (talk) 08:18, 23 July 2014 (UTC)
 * Deepred6502 (talk) 08:18, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Warning: Lobbyists Berman and Company at work
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)

IP address of 66.208.14.242 traces to Berman and Company, see the Whois report. I Spy With My Big Eye (talk) 11:03, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. I am not a lobbyist nor an I affiliated with Berman in any way, but if this is what the page looks like after it has been 'cleaned up' and had the 'bias removed,' I'm really glad I didn't see it before it was edited. It is still heavily canted and barely manages to be more than an online smear campaign, using the cachet of Wiki to validate a personal agenda. I see a listing of companies that Berman has worked for, with the broad insinuation that these affiliations are somehow unsavory; but the tone of the listing makes me wonder who the author of this page works for? One of the companies that Berman has successfully targeted, perhaps? This listing does not in my opinion reflect the kind of scholarship and ethical thoroughness that I associate with the Wiki name. Author, try again and try harder. Dsorceress (talk) 19:02, 20 May 2011 (UTC)Dsorceress

Revamping of article
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)


 * 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)

60 Minutes and USA Today, notable sources and fairly unbiased?? In what universe? Clearly you haven't read the 60 Minutes transcript. The interview was conducted by Morley Safer, and it is a condescending smear from the word go. (No, I am not Richard Berman, nor do I even know the man. I just know bias when I see it.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.87.24.2 (talk) 10:16, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

You have not been working on 'revamping' it, you have merely gone foraging for links to support your bias. Wikipedia is not a venue for you to publicly criticize Richard Berman; if you want to do that, the internet is chock full of dotcoms you can purchase to pound your drum. Wikipedia is provided for people to find truthful, UNBIASED information about people, places and things. This listing falls far short of unbiased, and flirts with the truth at times. At the very least take a course in debate and learn how to do so, because this article is riddled with ad hominem, inconsistencies, non sequiturs, and logical fallacies. Good thing you aren't being graded on this. Dsorceress (talk) 19:16, 20 May 2011 (UTC)Dsorceress

this was removed
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)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 1 one external link 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 II  Talk to my owner :Online 23:27, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
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)

Loaded words / phrasing
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)