Talk:Rick Alan Ross

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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rick Alan Ross (talk | contribs) at 19:53, 18 November 2023 (→‎Introduction additions). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Recent addition to background misleading with no historical context

Here we go again. Anonymous editors drop in to put something negative and/or misleading in my bio.

"A 2018 report by Human Rights Without Frontiers International includes a section on criticisms of Ross and his methodology. The report states, 'He [Rick Alan Ross] only has a high school diploma and does not have any education or credentials in religion.'"

The footnote for this addition is a dead link. There is nothing there.

This statement offers no historical context, but seems tied to anti-cult work in Israel. In fact, the Israeli Ministry of Social Affairs and Services sought my input for a policy paper titled "REPORT OF MINISTRY OF WELFARE AND SOCIAL SERVICES TEAM, AN EXAMINATION OF THE PHENOMENON OF CULTS IN ISRAEL" (March 2011) See https://culteducation.com/reference/general/AnExaminationOfThePhenomenonOfCultsInIsrael.pdf

Contained in the introduction of this report is the following:

The members of the Team wish to thank the researchers, counselors and other relevant parties who agreed to meet, who forwarded material, contributed their time and expressed their views, all in order to assist in the production of this report "from theory to practice". The following is only a partial list of the persons concerned, as, on account of the wish to maintain their privacy, we have elected not to publish the names of the families who appeared before the Committee.

  • Dr. Gaby Zohar, Clinical Social Worker, Therapist and Counselor to the cult

victim families.

  • Ms. Mati Lieblich, of the Hebrew University, Phd Candidate and researcher of

cult victims, a teacher in various disciplines and tutor of counseling training groups.

  • Dr. David Green, Specialist in Clinical Psychology and Principal of the "Green

Institute" of Advanced Psychology in Tel Aviv.

  • Dr. Uzi Shai, Psychiatrist, Ministry of Health, Tel-Aviv District.
  • Ms. Rachel Lichtenstein, Director of the Israel Center for Cult Victims.
  • Ms. Sharona Ben-Moshe, Legal Advisor to the Israel Center for Cult Victims.
  • Ms. Noa Shalom, Director of Eastern Division, Tel-Aviv Municipality
  • Ms. Noa Shaham, Director of Social Services Department, Lower Galilee.
  • Steven Alan Hassan, Director of the Freedom of Mind Resource Center.
  • Professor Marc Galanter, M.D. Professor of Psychiatry at NYU.
  • Bill Goldberg, Social Worker and Researcher.
  • Lorna Goldberg, Social Worker, Certified Psychoanalyst, Psychotherapist and

Researcher.

* Rick Ross, Executive Director of the Rick. A. Ross Institute. [now known as the Cult Education Institute]

  • Arnold Markowitz, Director of the Cult Hotline and Clinic of the Jewish Board of

Family and Children's Services in New York City.

Moreover the criticism is historically inaccurate. In my bio it is noted that I have been appointed to national committees for the Union of Reform Judaism and served as the officially appointed Jewish representative on the Religious Advisory Committee to the Arizona Department of Corrections. I was also the program coordinator for Jewish Prisoner Program for Jewish Family and Childrens Service of Arizona. It seems to me that these are "credentials" regarding a major faith group/relgion.Rick Alan Ross (talk) 19:34, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I was a consulting expert for an Israeli government report about cults. But apparently the "Human Rights Without Frontiers International" organization took issue with this and was critical. They stated, "He [Rick Alan Ross] only has a high school diploma and does not have any education or credentials in religion."

However, I served on national committees for the Union for Reform Judaism and represented the Jewish community officially on the Religious Advisory Committee to the Arizona Department of Corrections.

Given the historical inaccuracy and lack of context I suggest that this addition be deleted or amended to reflect historical context. That is, that this criticism be preceded by the statement that I consulted Israeli Ministry of Social Welfare and followed by some historical facts, such as my interreligious work and accepted court expert testimony.Rick Alan Ross (talk) 18:01, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve removed the dead link. I think it worked before, perhaps Path2space, who added the content, can help. Harold the Sheep (talk) 05:01, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for catching it. Will do. Path2space (talk) 04:25, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Out of date and incomplete

I realize that after it was exposed that this bio was being edited by cult members there was an effort to safeguard against this happening in the future. The net result seems to be the historical freezing of this bio without updates.

Please note that my work did not end in 2004, but rather continued and expanded. I have been very active, which this bio does not reflect.

This would include appearing in numerous documentaries (e.g HBO "The Vow" and "Seduced" Starz see https://www.oxygen.com/true-crime-buzz/who-is-cult-expert-rick-ross-whats-his-connection-to-nxivm ), testifying at the criminal trial of cult leader Keith Raniere 9 see https://www.timesunion.com/nxivm/article/Cult-expert-testifies-about-his-dealings-with-13972283.php 0and working as part of the creative team for the videogame "Far Cry 5." See https://www.nine.com.au/entertainment/viral/far-cry-5-cult-expert-rick-ross/ea820842-96f3-47dd-8b24-a5ac2f286f4f

I have also continued to testify in court proceedings across the United States and have been qualified, accepted and testified as a court expert in 11 states , including United States Federal Court, subsequent to a Daubert Hearing. See https://casetext.com/case/noyes-v-kelly-services/

My intervention work also continues and perhaps my most popular appearance as a "cult deprogrammer" was for Vanity Fair with more than 3 million views. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLoVHyuYVBY Rick Alan Ross (talk) 20:01, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

James T. Richardson quoted

The quote offered by James T. Richardson is not NPOV. Richardson was a frequent apologist for cults and he was recommended by Scientology and the "New Cult Awareness Network" (controlled by Scientology) as a resource. See https://culteducation.com/apologist42.html and also see https://www.culteducation.com/group/1073-cult-awareness-network/15149-who-the-so-called-new-can-recommends-for-factual-information-onnew-religions.html This is his view of "deprogramming," which was often on a voluntary basis. Many people leaving cults sought deprogramming.

"For purposes of legal analysis, there are three types of deprogramming. Voluntary deprogramming; forcible deprogramming; and deprogramming carried out with a court's sanction, usually in the form of an order of conservatorship." See https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2794&context=vlr I would also add involuntary deprogramming of a minor child overseen by a custodial parent or legal guardian. See https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-1989-06-08-8902070806-story.html And also see https://culteducation.com/group/1260-his-community/9793-gromers-using-deprogrammer-with-boys.html

The overwhelming majority of deprogramming I have done has been voluntary. Some were sanctioned by a court, custodial parent or legal guardian. Very few would fit the category of involuntary deprogramming with an adult. Those few interventions took place primarily in the late 1980s and ended in 1990 with the Jason Scott case.

There is an attempt being made to skew this biography with biased quotes from sources that are decidedly not NPOV.Rick Alan Ross (talk) 17:40, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just because someone is critical of the practice of deprogramming and the ideology behind it doesn’t mean they are a "cult member" or a "cult apologist"; those are just self-serving, reductionistic labels. James T. Richardson is a Professor of Sociology and Judicial Studies who is particularly known for his work in the area of the sociology of religion. He is not a "cult apologist", and neither are the many other academics and researchers into new religious movements and the anti-cult movement who have described deprogramming in similar or even stronger terms. Your insinuation below, that any editor who uses their work is a cult member promoting a cultish POV, is completely inappropriate. Harold the Sheep (talk) 03:16, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Richardson historically has expressed a very narrow POV in favor of groups like Scientology. And this is why he has been repeatedly recommended by that organization, often called a "cult." I don't know who your are or why you are here. You are an anonymous editor. Historically, this bio has had editors the were later exposed as cult members. Whoever you are you are certainly here to skew the bio to better represent your POV as anyone can see from edits and comments.Rick Alan Ross (talk) 21:59, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

POV editing

Recently there has been some POV editing here at this bio.

It must be noted that there is a history of cult members coming here and editing. Some were ultimately banned.

The quotes offered are from those specifically aligned with cults that have a very specific POV.

This is not NPOV editing.Rick Alan Ross (talk) 18:00, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I addressed this to some extent at User talk:Rick Alan Ross; the short version is that we're not mind readers and will need specific evidence of particular edits that need reverting or alteration and policy-based reasons why the edits are problematic.  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  20:26, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I have offered examples, analysis with links. The recent edits represent opinions POV and are not NPOV.Rick Alan Ross (talk) 22:01, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Anson Shupe not NPOV

Again the editing being done is specifically POV not NPOV. Anson Shupe, who is cited in a recent addition worked as an expert witness for Scientology lawyer Kendrick Moxon for a very considerable sum of money. See https://culteducation.com/group/1248-apologist/1958-when-scholars-know-sins.html

A long-time opponent of the "anti-cult movement" Shupe does not represent a NPOV. Rick Alan Ross (talk) 21:43, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, the addition of Shupe's remarks in no way adds anything to the bio, as the background section already notes nothing more than a high school education.

It's unclear if "religious credentials" means a degree or a history of work in the area of religion? If it's the later I have worked within well established religious organizations and have testified as a court expert witness concerning extreme religious groups in 11 states, including US Federal Court.

I suggest that the recent additions to this bio be deleted as they are POV and not NPOV.Rick Alan Ross (talk) 21:50, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The material is factual, correct? You're just commenting on the author? --Hipal (talk) 03:38, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
NO. The recent edits are not about facts, bur rather reflect the POV of some academics closely associated with groups called "cults." They are not NPOV, but a means of skewing this bio. If the bio is supposedly a fact based encyclopedia entry it must be NPOV and not skewed with POV opinions. This is an ongoing problem with Wikipedia, i.e. anyone can come in and anonymously edit using the edit process to skew a bio of a living person they oppose, don't like and/or wish to discredit.Rick Alan Ross (talk) 12:44, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
So factual, but you don't like the POV of some authors? --Hipal (talk) 17:27, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The recent edits reflect a POV. The editor is using critical comments made by people closely associated with cults who have a history of bias regarding the issue of cults. There are many others who have commented positively about my work, for example concerning NXIVM. This is cherry picking quotes for the purpose of slanting this bio.Rick Alan Ross (talk) 19:35, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Reflecting a POV isn't itself a problem. I don't see how the facts are "critical comments". --Hipal (talk) 19:44, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I think what @Hipal is trying to get at is: is there an issue with what the article itself is saying using the non-NPOV sources? --Jacquesparker0 (talk) 08:52, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know what "non-NPOV sources" means. --Hipal (talk) 17:05, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The source for the quotes are people closely associated with cults that have a history of defending groups called "cults." They are biased. This is not NPOV, but rather an example of cherry picking POV quotes for the purpose of slanting the bio. There are many positive quotes concerning my work that could have been used, but the editing is being done to slant the bio negatively.Rick Alan Ross (talk) 19:38, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Bias isn't itself a problem. Removing sources because they aren't "positive" is a problem. --Hipal (talk) 19:48, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
These sources are never positive about anyone opposing destructive cults. They have a distinct bias, which is well established due to their work history, public statements and writings. The editing here is often an example of what's wrong with Wikipedia, i.e. an anonymous editor can drop in and skew a bio about a living person to suite his or her whims and views about the subject. The bias of these sources has been exposed through published academic papers. For example see chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://skent.ualberta.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/popular-press-When-Scholars-Know-Sin.pdf And regarding the Jason Scott case civil lawsuit and its links to Scientology see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0dqX3Utt2U0 Jason Scott talks about he used by Scientology. Rick Alan Ross (talk) 14:07, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The source for the quotes are people closely associated with cults that have a history of defending groups called "cults." There are no quotes, there is one sentence mentioning the fact that you have no credentials in religion and no formal training in counseling or psychology. The Shupe source does not discuss the "cults" at all. Agents of Discord is about deprogramming as a practice, starting with Ted Patrick and moving through the history of the anti-cult movement, other deprogrammers, and the rise and fall of the CAN. It usually mentions the specific group or teacher associated with the victim of a deprogramming, but does not express opinions one way or the other about them. One thing it does do, however, is examine legal documents, court transcripts etc. that provide evidence of what went on during deprogrammings. That is what you don’t like, not their cult apologies, which are entirely absent. There is a quite detailed summary, for example, of the court evidence from the Jason Scott lawsuit. I'm of the opinion that we should include some of it in the article, there is very little description in the section "Jason Scott Deprogramming" of the actual "deprogramming". Considering the violent and farcical picture that emerges from the evidence, it is little wonder that the authors note that its primary architect, recommended by CAN and hired for a considerable sum of money, was a man with no formal training in counseling or psychology. Harold the Sheep (talk) 04:14, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. You have just recited a very biased view of the Jason Scott case and deprogramming, which reflects your purpose here. I don't know who you are, but your POV is plain to see. Jasons Scott was used as a pawn by Scientology. His lawyer in the civil suit was Scientology lead counsel Kendrick Moxon. Jason said he was used by Scientology in an interview with Leslie Stahl of CBS "60 Minutes." See https://vimeo.com/687209330 Subsequently, Jason Scott fired Kendrick Moxon and sold me the $2 million dollar judgement for $5,000.00 and 200 hours of my time as a cult deprogrammer, which is ironic, because it was deprogrammng that was the basis for the lawsuit. Jason left the church that was called a "cult" by his mother and never again attended it, despite his wife's devotion to that same church, which led to their divorce.
The fact that I have no formal education beyond high school is already in this biography. If "religious credentials" include serving on national committees for a large respected religious denomination (Union for Reform Judaism) and also representing the Jewish community statewide on the Religious Advisory Committee for the Arizona Department of Corrections, and serving both as its chairman and chairman of an International Coalition of Jewish Prisoner Programs sponsored by B'nai B'rith International, then the statement about religious credentials is patently false.
Also, regarding Anson Shupe, he was paid a very substantial sum by Kendrick Moxon to testify as an expert witness at the Jason Scott civil lawsuit trial. A published academic paper explores Shupe's bias and other academics closely associated with cults historically. See chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://skent.ualberta.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/popular-press-When-Scholars-Know-Sin.pdf Will someone please take the time to read about Shupe and his cooperation with Scientology? Hardly an unbiased scholar in this regard.
It seems to me given the public disclosures about Scientology and its abuses, along with reporting about destructive cults more generally such as NXIVM and many others that are deeply harmful if not deadly, these academics who apologized for cults and often worked for them, have been largely discredited by history. Perhaps you can pretend that these facts don't exist, but they are very widely reported and accepted. And as you know my work did not end with the Scott case, but rather greatly expanded and continued, which also has been widely reported. See https://www.oxygen.com/true-crime-buzz/who-is-cult-expert-rick-ross-whats-his-connection-to-nxivm and also https://seduceddocumentary.com/theexperts/rickalanross/ And see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLoVHyuYVBY&t=47s and also https://www.nine.com.au/entertainment/viral/far-cry-5-cult-expert-rick-ross/ea820842-96f3-47dd-8b24-a5ac2f286f4f
Regarding recognition of my expertise I have been a paid guest lecturer at universities and colleges across the United States and internationally. This has included the University of Pennsylvania at Philadelphia, University of Chicago and Carnegie Mellon. And my court expert testimony has included 11 states and US Federal Court. Each time I was qualified and accepted as an expert in court opposing counsel raised the issue of my education. Despite this I was qualified.Rick Alan Ross (talk) 15:01, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is going nowhere, other than putting you at risk of being blocked for failure to work with others in good faith. See WP:TALK.
I strongly suggest you work from edit requests. --Hipal (talk) 18:22, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If what you say is true then there is little hope of NPOV editing here regarding the biography of a living person. I have offered the facts, supporting documentation with links. There is no balance or historical context offered here, just quotes and citations from biased sources that were paid by cults (e.g. Scientology).Rick Alan Ross (talk) 18:32, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request: education and credentials

Please either delete or amend the following:

"Despite involving himself in many coercive interventions against individuals involved in New Religious Movements, Ross has no education or credentials in religion and no formal training in counselling or psychology."

This is at best superfluous and misleading. Cult intervention work is education not counseling psychotherapy. It is simply educating the individual regarding the history of cults and cult indoctrination and influence techniques based upon historical reporting and scientific research. I have never claimed or insinuated that I am a mental health professional providing related counseling services.

Concerning "credentials in religion." As reported I have served as the Jewish community representative to the Arizona Department of Corrections Religious Advisory Committee (elected chairman), the Committee on Interreligious Affairs for the Union of Reform Judaism, program coordinator for the Jewish Prisoner Program of Jewish and Family Children's Services of Phoenix, Arizona and the chairman of the International Coalition for Jewish Prisoner Programs sponsored by B'Nai B'Rith International. I was also an instructor for the Bureau of Jewish Education (under the Jewish Federation of Greater Phoenix) teaching courses on "Cults: Conersion through Coercion" for teenage students and adult education. This can be seen as "credentials in relgion."

That is, many would consider this "credentials in religion," unless what you mean is an ordination, or a degree in religious studies.

BTW -- groups called cults are not always religious, many have little if any connection to religious beliefs, e.g. NXIVM, the Sullivanians, Synanon, National Labor Federation, Odyssey Study Group, Breatharians, MOVE, Symbionese Liberation Army, etc. A cult can be based upon almost anything. So "New Religious Movements" (NRM) is not an accurate description and a bit dated.

Another point -- My work in what the editor describes as "coercive interventions" ended 32 years ago in 1990 (Jason Scott case). Of the more than 500 interventions I have done less than 1% were ever involuntary. Of those involuntary interventions many were with minor children under the direct supervision of a legal guardian. And some were with people under conservatorship and the direct supervision of a physician.

The statement must be more precise and fact based if it is not intended to deliberately mislead readers based upon the minority opinion expressed by some biased academic.

For example -- Some academics critical of Ross and his cult intervention work have pointed out that he has no degree in religious studies and is not a mental health professional.

This is simply stating the facts without skewing the entry.Rick Alan Ross (talk) 19:08, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No references offered. This appears to be WP:OR to change the WP:POV. --Hipal (talk) 19:38, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
This is not original research, but a statement based upon facts already cited in bio and the citation in question.
I do not have a degree beyond my high school diploma, e.g. in religious studies and am not a mental health professional. There is no dispute regarding these facts. This eliminates the POV coloring and cites only the plain facts. Rick Alan Ross (talk) 19:43, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Request for edit: Richardson's description

The following statement represents a point of view per a particular academic and lacks balance.

"Professor of Sociology and Judicial Studies James T. Richardson describes deprogramming as a 'private, self-help process whereby participants in unpopular new religious movements (NRMs) were forcibly removed from the group, incarcerated, and put through radical resocialization processes that were supposed to result in their agreeing to leave the group.'"

It must be amended, both for balance and context.

I suggest the following:

There has been some controversy regarding the practice of deprogamming. Author and clinical psychologist Margaret Singer writes in her book "Cults in Our Midst" that deprogramming is "Providing members with information about the cult and showing them how their own decision-making power had been taken away from them." (Margaret Singer, Cults in Our Midst,San Francisco: Jossey Bass Publishers, 1995). But Professor of Sociology and Judicial Studies James T. Richardson, a defender of new religious movements called "cults," described deprogramming as the "private, self-help process whereby participants in unpopular new religious movements (NRMs) were forcibly removed from the group, incarcerated, and put through radical resocialization processes that were supposed to result in their agreeing to leave the group."[19] However, according to Vanderbilt Law Review "For purposes of legal analysis, there are three types of deprogramming. Voluntary deprogramming; forcible deprogramming; and deprogramming carried out with a court's sanction, usually in the form of an order of conservatorship." See https://scholarship.law.vanderbilt.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2794&context=vlr Rick Alan Ross (talk) 19:30, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please check and update the url. You may want to provide full citation information so it can be found in another manner. --Hipal (talk) 19:36, 16 November 2023 (UTC) That now works. Thanks! --Hipal (talk) 19:40, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Doing my best.Rick Alan Ross (talk) 20:52, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested additions -- Other Activities

I suggest updating the other activities section as there is relevant and notable work since 2014

In 2015 Ross appeared in the documentary "Deprogrammed" about the life of the first cult deprogrammer Ted Patrick. See https://www.eyesteelfilm.com/portfolio/deprogrammed

Ross appeared in the documentary "Holy Hell" released worldwide by CNN in 2016 directed and produced by a former cult member of the group "Buddhafield." See https://www.cnn.com/2016/09/01/us/holy-hell-buddhafield-searching-for-michel/index.html

Rick Ross was tapped to be part of the creative team at Ubisoft for the very popular videogame "Far Cry 5" released worldwide in 2018. See https://www.nine.com.au/entertainment/viral/far-cry-5-cult-expert-rick-ross/ea820842-96f3-47dd-8b24-a5ac2f286f4f and see https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikkain/2017/10/26/an-exclusive-behind-the-scenes-look-at-the-making-of-far-cry-5s-cult/?sh=7eae929561a1 In 2017 Ross appeared in the ABC News documentary "Truth and Lies: The Family Manson." See https://abcnews.go.com/US/video/truth-lies-family-manson-fri-march-17-98c-45941821 and see https://www.imdb.com/title/tt6638954/

Ross testified for the prosecution at the criminal trial of NXIVM cult leader Keith Raniere in 2019. Raniere was found guilty of racketeering, human trafficking, sex offenses, and fraud and sentenced to 120 years in prison and a $1.75 million fine. See https://www.justice.gov/usao-edny/pr/founder-nxivm-purported-self-help-organization-and-five-others-charged-superseding and see https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/27/nyregion/nxivm-cult-keith-raniere-sentenced.html

In 2020 Ross appeared in the widely watched documentaries "The Vow" and "Seduced" concerning NXIVM and Raniere. See https://onezero.medium.com/cult-deprogrammer-rick-alan-ross-on-nxivm-qanon-and-what-makes-us-vulnerable-62f6c709562c and see https://seduceddocumentary.com/theexperts/rickalanross/

Ross appeared in the documentary "The Rise and Fall of LulaRoe, which examined a controversial multi-level marketing "cult-like" company in 2021. See https://www.forbes.com/sites/risasarachan/2021/12/13/the-rise-and-fall-of-lularoe-investigates-scandal-behind--marketing-company/?sh=3d30925e3615

In 2021 Ross appeared as an expert analyst to critique films about cults for Vanity Fair watched by more than 3.6 million viewers on YouTube. See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLoVHyuYVBY&t=98s

Ross appeared on the "Dr. Phil Show" 2021 that first exposed cult leader Amy Carlson now the focus of a new HBO documentary "Love Has Won: The Cult of Mother God," (2023). See https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hpR2nKVlDYQ And see https://www.cbsnews.com/colorado/news/amy-carlson-hbo-love-has-won-cult-colorado-documentary/ Rick Alan Ross (talk) 20:21, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please review WP:IS and WP:RSP, then identify all references you think may be usable in respect to their guidance. --Hipal (talk) 20:26, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
All of the sources supporting the various historical trials, videogame, documentaries are cited with links. They all fit well within Wikipedia guidelines as reliable sources.Rick Alan Ross (talk) 20:52, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No they do not, per WP:RSP. --Hipal (talk) 21:35, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
ABC News, Forbes, CNN, Vanity Fair, CBS News, New York Times all on WP:RSP list.Rick Alan Ross (talk) 22:38, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding the documentary "Deprogrammed" see https://www.tvguide.com/movies/deprogrammed/2000232401/ TV Guide on WP: RSP listRick Alan Ross (talk) 22:43, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding the documentary "Seduced" see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seduced:_Inside_the_NXIVM_Cult already established through notes here at Wikipedia.Rick Alan Ross (talk) 22:49, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding the HBO documentary "The Vow" this article describes and shows my appearance on screen. https://recapulet.com/2020/12/22/episode-6-honesty-disclosure/ Recapulet is not on the list but with W also see https://www.wmagazine.com/culture/seduced-starz-documentary-india-oxenberg-nxivm can we not establish that I was in the documentary? Variety mentions my historical significance See https://variety.com/2020/tv/news/the-vow-where-are-keith-raniere-allison-mack-1234808846/ The episode that I appeared in is listed here https://www.imdb.com/title/tt12496820/ I get that there is a list, but it was widely reported that I appeared in the docuseries. Rick Alan Ross (talk) 23:02, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for checking. Forbes contributors are not to be used. --Hipal (talk) 23:42, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. What about all the other sources, which appear on the WP: RSP list?Rick Alan Ross (talk) 11:59, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding my work on Far Cry 5 released by Ubisoft See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Seed My work is already recognized elsewhere on Wikipedia.Rick Alan Ross (talk) 12:07, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ross appeared in the documentary "The Rise and Fall of LulaRoe https://www.tvguide.com/movies/the-rise-and-fall-of-lularoe/cast/2060041973/ My work on this documentary is reported by TV Guide.Rick Alan Ross (talk) 12:10, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Introduction additions

I suggest updating to the introduction to reflect current status and public descritions.

Rick Alan Ross (b. 1952) has been described as "America's leading cult expert" and "America's foremost deprogrammer." He is an internationally known cult specialist, and founder and executive director of the nonprofit Cult Education Institute. He frequently appears in the news and other media discussing groups some consider cults. Ross has intervened in more than 500 deprogramming cases in various countries. See https://www.gq.com/story/the-cult-of-trump And see https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a40105747/the-follower-staten-island-1980s-cult/ See https://gothamist.com/arts-entertainment/rick-ross-cult-expert and see https://www.courttv.com/title/7-22-20-cult-expert-rick-alan-ross-talks-failed-doomsday-prophecies/ and see https://www.trtworld.com/video/the-innerview/cult-expert-rick-alan-ross-decodes-brainwashing-tactics-or-the-innerview-15517767 and see https://www.news.com.au/technology/home-entertainment/gaming/inside-the-mind-of-a-cult-member-according-to-a-professional-deprogrammer/news-story/873d58343e1bd4108693c1258ec0d9d0

There are many more, but these are a few independent sources to confirm the descriptions to be added.Rick Alan Ross (talk) 21:13, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

They look rather poor overall, though none stand out as completely inappropriate like those in the previous discussion. I don't think there's anything here that suggests major POV changes to the lede. --Hipal (talk) 21:39, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I came here from the BLP Noticeboard page. Agreed that we shouldn't introduce someone as "leading" before their profession is mentioned (NPOV). --PeaceNT (talk) 03:18, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
OK. But given the amount of media coverage and descriptions of my work it seems to me that this might be appropriate lead.
Rick Alan Ross (b. 1952) is an American cult deprogrammer, court expert, author and founder and executive director of the nonprofit Cult Education Institute. He in an internationally known cult expert that frequently appears in the news and other media discussing groups called "cults." Ross has intervened in more than 500 deprogramming cases in various countries.
It seems to me that the Scott case (1990-1995) in the lead is misplaced. It is not what is most prominent in my bio. Probably the fact that I have appeared in 27 documentaries and was a paid guest lecturer at more than 40 universities and colleges in the United States and Asia is more relevant to the reader or at least something to be mentioned.
Most people know me through documentaries, news reports, news shows, talk shows, podcasts, lectures, my book and culteducation.com
NXIVM and the Waco Davidian standoff are the most prominent cult events in my work history. But the Jason Scott case is not how I am known by the public, its meaningful to be included, but not equally prominent when compared to NXIVM and Waco.
My book was the first book about cults to mention NXIVM. And the papers by two respected doctors published at culteducation.com was the first critical analysis by mental health professionals released about NXIVM. Raniere's 14-year legal battle with me, which he ultimately lost, was widely reported. And of course I worked with the Justice Department and FBI regarding his prosecution and testified as a fact witness at his trial. It seems to me that my battle with Raniere will be as important as Waco historically, due to legal precedents established. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NXIVM_Corp._v._Ross_Institute
I have been sued five times by groups called cults. All those lawsuits were dismissed through a motion for summary judgement. None went to trial. These were significant victories for free speech and freedom of information online through website archives like the Cult Education Institute and Wikipedia. For example see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Landmark_Worldwide#:~:text=In%20June%202004%2C%20Landmark%20filed,their%20clients%20damaged%20Landmark's%20product Landmark tried to spin this loss, but this may be the only time Landmark sought to dismiss its own lawsuit. This was also significant precedent setting legal victory for the freedom of expression on public message boards.
And of course working on the massively popular Far Cry videogame series for "Far Cry 5," which grossed more than $300 million and sold more than 25 million copies, is how so many videogame enthusiasts know about me.
Rick Alan Ross (talk) 12:52, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Unless this bio is an effort to present me in the worst possible light through POV editing it must be more balanced and reflect my actual work history and the scope of my work. Please retract. All you're doing is pushing away the people that are working to address your concerns. --Hipal (talk) 18:27, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Deleted. Rick Alan Ross (talk) 19:47, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
News sources have a bias towards scandal, which Wikipedia should try to counter to an extent, but it's not cleared to me as an uninvolved editor exactly what sort of more mundane material would make sense to add. Sennalen (talk) 19:21, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I am not quite how "bias towards scandal" is relevant. My work on Far Cry 5, the documentaries, NXIVM criminal trial testimony and Vanity Fair interview are notable and bring the bio up to date. Do you mean that reporting about cults that abuse people must be considered scandal reporting? My work did not cease in 2004 and in fact expanded and continued.Rick Alan Ross (talk) 15:41, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is this a historically objective biography?

At this point after suggesting some edits and additions to make this bio both accurate and historically relevant I would like express some concern about recent edits that are a rather one sided effort to skew the bio for the purpose of promoting a point of view, which can be seen as little more than propaganda.

Did my work history cease in 2004?

It would seem from this bio page that for the past 20 years I have done nothing.

Is that accurate and does that represent an authentic effort to edit an objective biography?

As anyone can see from the many links regarding my documentary work, court battle with NXIVM and subsequent testimony at cult leader Keith Raniere's criminal trial and my work on the videogame "Far Cry 5" there has been considerable work reported in the past 20 years that is both relevant and notalbe.

So why isn't it in this bio?

It is reflected elsewhere on Wikipedia.

Certainly reliable and credible sources according to Wikipedia have reported it.

So what is really happening with this bio?

NXIVM, by any objective measurement, is far more noteworthy than the Jason Scott case. The decades old Scott case deserves a place in this bio, but doesn't warrant a position in the lead.

Any objective editor would put NXIVM in the lead and follow with Waco.

Also, there is undue weight given here to minority opinions regarding my work. Relatively obscure academics from years ago are quoted as if they are somehow absolute authorities. However, these same academics lost their arguments defending cults over the years due to the destructive behavior, criminal acts and media exposure of destructive cults. These same academics, like the cults they defended, claimed these so-called "new religious movements" were "persecuted" or "attacked," when their bad behavior was simply being exposed.

My hope is that this bio will reflect the historical facts without having it skewed through misleading edits.Rick Alan Ross (talk) 17:29, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Harold the Sheep"

Just a heads up to anyone following this talk page.

"Harold the Sheep" is also quite active editing the Steven Alan Hassan BLP.

Is it a coincidence that this editor is focused on the BLPs of two cult experts?

Is it a coincidence that this editor's edits repeatedly advance the opinions of same group of academics regarding their defense of so-called "new religious movements" and arguments against the existence or use of cultic manipulation to gain undue influence for the purpose of exploitation?

See https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Steven_Hassan&action=history regarding editing at the Hassan page.

I have been critical of Steven Hassan regarding his false claims of "teaching at Harvard" and essentially conflating his his CV. But Harold's edits have been less about facts and more about a point of view.

Please take the time to review Harold's edits here and at the Hassan page and you will see that they consistently fit a pattern that expresses a particular point of view through chosen quotes and wording.

So what is the actual objective of such editing? Is it to make Wikipedia better? Or is it more about using Wikipedia as a platform to advance what can easily be seen as propaganda, rather than simply objective editing.

I don't know who Harold is, so this is NOT a "personal attack," it's simply a heads up regarding the nature and purpose of his editing.19:26, 18 November 2023 (UTC) Rick Alan Ross (talk) 19:26, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Rick_Alan_Ross&oldid=1185749900"