A Washington D.C. research hub that’s funded some widely cited studies casting doubt on the effectiveness of minimum-wage hikes is operated by a public relations firm that represents high-powered corporations and industries that oppose such increases, the New York Times revealed Monday.
The Times’ story dovetails with our Monday fact check that found a 10-year-old conclusion about minimum-wage workers doesn’t translate to today’s economic climate. The basis for the claim we checked – that two thirds of minimum-wage workers receive raises in their first year on the job – came from one of many such studies bankrolled by the Employment Policies Institute. The statistic was mentioned in recent op-eds by San Diego tech entrepreneur Michael Robertson and Washington Post columnist George F. Will.
We gave Robertson’s claim an Unfounded rating, in part because the only research on the issue was funded by EPI, a group that has opposed minimum-wage increases.
The researchers behind that study maintain their analysis wasn’t colored by EPI’s slant on the issue. But without any other studies to compare it to, that’s virtually impossible to verify.
Monday’s Times story will likely inspire more questions about this and other EPI-funded studies, which are often used to buttress arguments against minimum-wage hikes.
EPI is led by advertising exec Richard B. Berman, whose PR firm counts major corporations among its top clients and has run websites such as minimumwage.com, which includes a list of several apparent myths about minimum-wage hikes and points visitors to EPI research to support its points, according to the Times.
Support Independent Journalism Today
@Jim Jones I can tell you've never written for a newspaper or any media because you believe reporters make all the decisions about what they write.
@Jim Jones Why are you so rude all the time?
The minimum wage increase recently passed in the state is prudent. I would suspect much of the increased income will go towards basics such as utility costs and food both of which have increased.
Whether it leads to a noticeable decrease in Jobs is yet to be seen.
To suggest it will have no effect is foolish.
@Jim Jones What's your source on "very few people" working for minimum wage? Show your work.
You have to remember that all stories in the NYTimes are written with a bias toward the paper's editorial agenda, which is extremely "progressive." Any time you happen to know something about an issue and read about it in the Times, unless you happen to share their agenda, it makes your hair stand on end!
@amy roth What do you know about this issue that calls the conclusion into question?
This is one of the reasons that Darrell Huff's book, How to Lie With Statistics, is a classic that resonates today, even though published in 1954. It should be required reading for all journalists. For those of us who may not have time to become experts on statistics, it's important that we consider the source (and the sponsors of the source) and carefully consider conflicting views. Politics is not the only arena of these shenanigans. Medical research is another area ripe with manipulative "research." "Who funded the research?" is always an appropriate question, though it is not always easy to discover.
@Chris Brewster There we have it, a leftie describing one of the reasons for the decline of their establishment media.