Talk:Adam Kovacevich

This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard. If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.

This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Biography This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography Politics Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of politics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PoliticsWikipedia:WikiProject PoliticsTemplate:WikiProject Politicspolitics Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. United States Low‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE. BlueRoses13 (talk · contribs) has been paid by Adam Kovacevich on their behalf. COI declared at userpage.

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.

I’d like to submit the following four requests for review. I’ve tried to keep the changes as limited as possible. For each claim, I’ve provided at least one substantive source and explained my thinking. Thank you for your consideration.

I’d like to change this sentence:

Kovacevich personally donated to the 2018 campaign of United States Representative Jim Jordan and helped campaign for Tom Cotton's U.S. House of Representatives election in 2012 and his Senate run in 2014.

to this:

During his time at Google, Kovacevich personally donated to both Democratic and Republican candidates.

Explanation: The original sentence is incomplete and misleading. Here’s a full list, as verified by OpenSecrets.org (https://www.opensecrets.org/donor-lookup/results?name=adam+kovacevich):

10 Democrats: Joe Biden, Suzan DelBene, Mike Doyle, Tim Kaine, Amy Klobuchar, Joe Lieberman, Zoe Lofgren, Brian Schatz, Eric Swalwell, and Inez Tenenbaum.

6 Republicans: Tom Cotton, Will Hurd, Jim Jordan, Jerry Moran, Ben Sasse, and Roger Wicker.

Also, there seems to be a bias toward including Tom Cotton, so if we single him out, then it’s only fair to note that in 2021, Kovacevich said of Cotton, “I support him as a friend, but that doesn’t mean we agree on policies” (https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2021/04/chamber-of-progress-google-facebook-amazon-twitter/).

I’d like to remove the following sentence:

He is a fourth generation American of Serbian ancestry.

Explanation: The footnotes for this claim — https://www.thecrimson.com/article/1997/12/1/non-unionized-farms-not-exploitative-says-grape/ and https://adamkovacevich.com — don’t say anything about Serbia. Perhaps that’s because Kovacveich is not of Serbian ancestry. :-)

I’d like to change this:

Kovacevich is the son of John J. Kovacevich, a California agriculture magnate.

to this:

Kovacevich is the son of John J. Kovacevich, a California agriculture businessman.

Explanation: John Kovacevich was hardly a “magnate.” That’s a loaded term, which makes people think of wealth and power. In fact, Kovacevich Farms filed for bankruptcy and shut down in 2016 (https://www.bakersfield.com/news/business/farmers-loss-is-gain-for-another/article_b123f73c-ec85-5fb2-9192-519b3037721b.html). It seems that “businessman” is both more accurate and less biased than “magnate.”

I’d like to add the following sentence to the “Politics” section:

In 2021, Kovacevich expressed support for President Biden’s proposed tax increase on corporations.

Explanation: This position has been well-documented; see, for example, https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/15/tech-industry-group-funded-by-amazon-facebook-and-google-supports-a-corporate-tax-hike.html.

Signed,
BlueRoses13 (talk) 10:33, 26 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done.

Thank you very much, Heartmusic678! Signed, BlueRoses13 (talk) 14:46, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@BlueRoses13: You're welcome. Heartmusic678 (talk) 14:49, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.

I'd like to submit three more requests for review. These changes add context that's missing, without which the article is incomplete. For each change, I've provided multiple substantive sources and explained my thinking. Thank you for your consideration.

I’d like to change the first sentence from this:

Adam Kovacevich is an American lobbyist and the CEO and founder of Chamber of Progress.

to this:

Adam Kovacevich is an American lobbyist, former Google executive, and former Democratic aide who is the CEO and founder of Chamber of Progress.

Explanation: Kovacveich is known as much for his decade at Google as he is for founding the Chamber of Progress; hence the addition of "Google executive," which is supported by https://www.politico.com/newsletters/morning-tech/2021/04/30/leaked-google-email-reveals-ties-to-new-pro-tech-group-794997 and https://www.politico.com/states/california/story/2021/07/11/nowhere-to-be-found-the-internet-industrys-dc-powerhouse-recedes-1388216.

And neither of these positions would have been possible without his time in Democratic politics; hence the addition of "Democratic aide," which is supported by https://www.bakersfield.com/columnists/in-the-eye-of-a-political-storm/article_0619fdd8-e5d1-5e8f-8c33-843389bf82ee.html.

I’d like to change this sentence:

After graduating from Harvard, Kovacevich worked for United States Senator Joe Lieberman before going to work for Google, where he spent 12 years, eventually becoming senior director of public policy.^[1]

to this:

After graduating from Harvard, Kovacevich worked in Democratic politics. He served as spokesperson for then-congressman Cal Dooley,^[2][3] who was a founder of the moderate New Democrat Coalition; for Senator Joe Lieberman, both in the United States Senate^[4] and on his 2004 presidential campaign;^[5][6] and for Inez Tenenbaum in her 2004 campaign for the United States Senate.^[4][7]

In 2007, he went to work for Google, where he spent 12 years, eventually becoming senior director of public policy.^[1] Of note: He launched Google’s public policy blog.^[8]

Explanation: I think Wikipedia readers will want to know the key details of Kovacevich’s career, each of which I've documented with footnotes.

After this:

Kovacevich was successful in having the Harvard grape ban overturned.

I’d like to add this:

In 2000, following the vote by students at Standard to overturn that university's grape ban, the United Farm Workers announced a permanent end to its grape boycott.

Explanation: I believe Wikipedia readers deserve greater context about this incident, which was covered by the Los Angeles Times (https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2000-nov-22-mn-55663-story.html) and the Stanford Report (https://news.stanford.edu/news/2000/december6/grapes-126.html).

Signed,
BlueRoses13 (talk) 02:51, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Heartmusic678 (talk) 12:13, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much, Heartmusic678! Signed, BlueRoses13 (talk) 12:49, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@BlueRoses13: You're welcome :D. Heartmusic678 (talk) 12:51, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This edit request by an editor with a conflict of interest has now been answered.

Would it make sense to add a sentence about Kovacevich's punditry? As you can see from his Authory page, he is often called upon by the mainstream media to offer the perspective of technology companies.

I think we can find a balance between, say, the 26 publications itemized in Linda Moore and the single sentence in Michael Beckerman ("He appears in the media to offer the industry's perspective on topical policy issues").

Here's what I propose (maybe as as the last line in the "career" section?):

For your convenience, I've formatted the six footnotes.

Thank you for your consideration.

His op-eds, on tech issues, have appeared in media such as the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review,^[1] The Philadelphia Inquirer,^[2] and Fortune,^[3] and he's appeared on TV channels such as Cheddar,^[4] C-SPAN,^[5] and Bloomberg Television.^[6]

Signed,
BlueRoses13 (talk) 01:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

 Done. Heartmusic678 (talk) 11:48, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure this guy is notable. Most of the references are to his own work or his own site. A quick Google News search shows he's been ~commenting on tech-related things, but there's nothing really about this guy or why he's notable. Open to other interpretations. MAINEiac4434 (talk) 20:12, 7 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MAINEiac4434 - apparently I created this article, at the time thinking it's WP:N. On further review, I'm inclined to agree with you insofar as I think it's a very marginal case. There's enough coverage to fill-out a BLP, however, it takes the form of a sentence from a source here and a sentence from a source there, that are then cobbled together into what gives the appearance of SIGCOV but may not actually be. If it's nominated for deletion I'll weakly support deletion, but I'm not likely to nominate it myself. Though I think it should be resolved one way or the other rather than just having the template hang over the top of the article. Chetsford (talk) 08:22, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]