Jump to content

Talk:Global Strategy Group

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Updating Outside of New York section

[edit]

Hello again,

I'm returning to propose updates to the Outside of New York subsection. First, I'd like to ask that the section heading be changed to National work. While GSG once worked primarily with New York-based clients, the NY/non-NY dichotomy no longer describes the firm's business. It is now, as I think the revised section below establishes, a national firm with a particularly big footprint in NY politics.

As I did above with the New York State section, I've put together a side-by-side that shows all the changes I'm looking to make. I'll briefly summarize those:

  • Add summary claim that GSG is one of the largest Democratic polling firms in America
  • Cut down content on clients from 10-15 years ago, grouped them together into a single sentence
  • Add a number of more recent clients, including governors, senators, and House reps
  • Add a sentence about large national Democratic organizations that GSG has worked with
  • Add a sentence about the establishment of Navigator Research in 2018 (a version of this sentence used to appear in the History and organization section; I think it makes sense here)
  • Add a brief paragraph about GSG joining with other big Democratic polling firms to review practices
  • Add a brief paragraph about working with Center for American Progress to develop "MAGA Republican" messaging
  • Add mention of the firm's Business & Politics study, which it has delivered every year for the past decade (as with Navigator, a version of this sentence used to be in the History and organization)

Here is the side-by-side:

If all my suggested changes were implemented, the section would look like this:

I know this is a lot, so independent editors: please take your time working through the material. I'm available to make any fixes and/or provide any clarity that you may need. Many thanks to whoever takes this request on. ES at Global Strategy Group (talk) 14:34, 3 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ES at Global Strategy Group: I started to review the info to make sure the sources corroborated the info they are placed next to, and #2 doesn't match. It is a book about the country of Georgia. I searched and didn't see anything about Al Gore. Indeed, I only found this, that Hickman did some polling for him, but that was before Hickman was at GSG. Please find a better source, or remove Gore, and ping me. Also, I started this process by moving the criticism of Hickman's conflicting client work to the Political consulting#Conflicts of interest, where it fits better, since the criticism really applies to all political consultants. STEMinfo (talk) 00:23, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
And I realize that info predated you, but you should want everything in your requests to be properly soruced. STEMinfo (talk) 00:26, 12 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, User:STEMinfo: Thanks so much for helping out with this request. I've found a solid source for the Gore claim. I'll drop it into the relevant sentence, so that all the code is easy to copy and paste:
Its past clients have included Al Gore during his 2000 presidential run,[1] John Edwards in 2008,[2] former Governor of Iowa Chet Culver,[3] and former Governor of Montana Brian Schweitzer.[4]
Relevant quote from that new source: "The merger between Democratic polling firms Global Strategy Group and Hickman Research became official Tuesday (...) Talks about joining forces began during the 2000 presidential campaign of then-Vice President Al Gore, for whom both firms were working. Hickman was one of the lead pollsters in that campaign."
If you need anything else from me, please let me know. Thanks again, ES at Global Strategy Group (talk) 19:39, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Done @ES at Global Strategy Group: I made the changes. The info is properly sourced and isn't promotional. As mentioned earlier, the criticism of paid consulting was moved to Political consulting#Conflicts of interest where it makes more sense per WP:UNDUE. STEMinfo (talk) 00:36, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, User:STEMinfo. I very much appreciate the help. ES at Global Strategy Group (talk) 16:46, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposing new Advocacy campaigns section

[edit]

Hello,

I've returned to this Talk page to propose an all-new Advocacy campaigns section. While the article does a solid job summarizing GSG's work in electoral politics and within the corporate sector, it doesn't currently have anything about the significant amount of work the firm has done on political and social issues such as abortion access, gun safety, and criminal justice reform. This new section addresses that information gap by detailing some of the more high-profile advocacy projects GSG has been involved in over the past several years.

You can read the full text by clicking this dropdown:

I know I'm proposing a lot here, so please feel free to suggest ways that I can improve this draft. I'm available to field any and all feedback. Thanks in advance to editors who take the time to review! ES at Global Strategy Group (talk) 19:26, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Bringing this to User:STEMinfo's attention, in case they're interested in reviewing. They should feel no obligation to help out; I'm just checking in because they have reviewed past requests. Thanks! ES at Global Strategy Group (talk) 17:52, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Aaron for GSG: There's some duplicate text and stray syntax. STEMinfo (talk) 00:16, 25 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
User:STEMinfo: Sorry about that. Thanks for pointing out the mistake. Here's a fixed version of the draft:
I believe that's error-free now. Please let me know if you spot anything else, or if you've got issues with the content/sourcing in the draft. I'm happy to make adjustments as needed. Cheers! Aaron for GSG (talk) 20:37, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Aaron for GSG: Your requested changes have been implemented, but with two minor modifications. I changed the last sentence of the second paragraph, and the first sentence of the third, to better reflect what was reported in the sources. STEMinfo (talk) 18:53, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Again, I think your adjustments to the copy are thoughtful and fair. Thanks so much for thoroughly reviewing this, User:STEMinfo. Aaron for GSG (talk) 21:25, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Proposing revisions to Amazon subsection

[edit]

Hello,

My request above, concerning a new Advocacy campaigns section, has been sitting for nearly two months. It's there for editors to review if they'd like to, and I'm happy to respond to any feedback I receive on it, but for now I'm going to move on to proposing changes to the Amazon subsection. This is a smaller request, which I hope editors will have a relatively easy time reviewing.

The Amazon subsection is mostly fine. It doesn't flatter the firm, obviously, but what's in there has been reported by reputable news publications. What I'm seeking to do is add context about GSG's response to the reporting. Here's a side-by-side comparison featuring the current subsection vs. what I'd like to see:

Here is what subsection would look like if all my proposed changes were made:

I'm available to discuss any of these proposed changes with non-COI editors. Thank you in advance to anyone who makes the effort to review this request! ES at Global Strategy Group (talk) 15:41, 1 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! I'm Aaron, also a GSG employee. I've added myself to the COI template at the top of the page, but I also wanted to make clear here that I'm going to be filling in, looking after my colleague's edit requests while she's out of office for a bit. So if editors have feedback on this request or the one above, please try to tag me into your conversation. Thanks! Aaron for GSG (talk) 20:22, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Done @Aaron for GSG: I kept the 2022 in the revision, since there are multiple union efforts to disambiguate, and I kept the fact that GSG was criticized. I put in the company's denials for WP:BALANCE, but also revised the wording about the company adding anti-union work avoidance language to their contracts. The source attributes the existence of the language to a statement the company made. I've not seen any reported confirmation that the language is actually there. STEMinfo (talk) 22:40, 24 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Those adjustments seem totally fair to me. Thanks for reviewing and implementing the edits, User:STEMinfo! Aaron for GSG (talk) 20:29, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Updates to article introduction

[edit]

Hello again,

Since the article has changed quite a bit over the past year, I thought it would be a good idea to update the introduction. I've put together a draft:

As I understand it, introductions are supposed to give a brief overview of the subject, ideally using claims that are contained within the body of the article. I've constructed this intro draft with that in mind. Everything I'm seeking to add is stated, in some form, within the article's body.

I'll now step aside and let independent editors review what I have above. Happy to field feedback and make adjustments to the draft above as needed. Thanks! ES at Global Strategy Group (talk) 17:57, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Partly done: This isn't bad, but it very strongly emphasizes the firm's advising specific politicians, which represents less than half of the article, and mentioned all of their other work in one sentence. I have added this in while significantly trimming the long list of politicians, which looks like namedropping. Feel free to reopen the request to suggest further changes. Rusalkii (talk) 18:17, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That all makes perfect sense to me. Thanks so much for your help, User:Rusalkii! ES at Global Strategy Group (talk) 20:40, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Adding info about polling for Kamala Harris campaign

[edit]

Hello again,

It was recently reported in the Washington Post that GSG is doing polling for Kamala Harris's presidential campaign. Given that this is quite a significant development in the firm's history, I'm asking that this information be added to the National work subsection as well as the article's introduction. For National work, I suggest adding a sentence about the Harris polling and breaking up the first paragraph so that it's a little less cumbersome (the new sentence is highlighted):

And for the introduction, I'm asking that a clause be added to cover this development (again, new content is highlighted):

I recently talked to User:Rusalkii about updates to the introduction, so I'll tag them in here. Other independent editors are welcome to jump in as well. I'm happy to answer any questions or feedback they may have. Thanks! ES at Global Strategy Group (talk) 21:18, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

 Go ahead: I have reviewed these proposed changes and suggest that you go ahead and make the proposed changes to the page. Rusalkii (talk) 21:52, 17 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I just posted the changes to the article. Thanks so much, User:Rusalkii! ES at Global Strategy Group (talk) 18:56, 19 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]