"Pay for Play" : Missouri Lawyers Media | Demand Objectivity and Transparency
The Issue
The issue is transparency. The issue is "vanity awards". The issue is "Carpet Bagger" Law Firms. The issue is "Lottery Ticket" personal injury litigation and the selling of unjustified expectations. The illusion of legal competence and client first representation that is obscured by the "Big Law Public Relations Industrial Complex".
Consumers Beware: Both the Federal Trade Commission and the Missouri Supreme Court Rules (rule 4) have created consumer advisors and codified safe guards that the choice of an attorney should not be based solely upon advertisements.
Exhibit (a) - consumer.ftc.gov: https://consumer.ftc.gov/look-beyond-award-when-you-hire-lawyer#:~:text=When%20you%20do%2C%20you're%20likely%20to%20see,long%20has%20this%20award%20been%20in%20existence%3F
Exhibit (b) - For Missouri Supreme Court Model Rules of Professional Conduct see the bottom of this petition for the extensive enumerated citations and their application.
Though I make not statement of fact, this is what I, as a consumer have observed with regard to Missouri Lawyers Media and their prolific creation of "Award Categories" and "Award Ceremonies".
1) Create a category with a title such as : Power Litigator, Warrior Princess 2026, The Gold Standard Award, etc.
2) The award and event now requires both: a) sponsors and b) award candidate submissions.
What is observable is how often the same "big money" law firms sponsor these events and how often the attorneys and associates of these "big money" law firms are the award recipients"
The Simon Law Firm P.C. in St, Louis Missouri would be a primary example of this "pay for play" phenomenon. The link below is an up and coming event created by Missouri Lawyers Media and upon close examination you can identify the anomaly of how prolifically associates of the Simon Law Firm P.C. are presented. - It is a statistical anomaly.
3) Submissions for award candidates are made "stuffing the ballot box". A banquet or gala is held where the awards ceremony takes place including the paparazzi employed by Missouri Lawyers Media.
4) Missouri Lawyers Media publishes (as an objective news source) the winners of the prestigious awards of which Missouri Lawyers Media had created.
5) The sponsoring law firm and their associates who won the awards flood the social media landscape with these awards (which are not worth the tin they are made out of) creating an unjustified expectation in the mind of a consumer that the firm and associates are the compassionate, zealous advocates and winningest law firm.
6) Approximately every 30-45 days Missouri Lawyers Media repeats the cycle and the same group of "big money" law firms once again, are the sponsors of the event and anomalously the recipients of the awards.
Ladies and gentlemen, that is the "pay for play" game that we the consumer have been warned about.
Therefore, demand is made for Missouri Lawyers Media to 1) Dispense with these fraudulent award categories and ceremonies. 2) Democratize their awards and give "fan-fare to the common man. 3) Stop suppressing the negative news of the attorneys, lawyers and law firms that sponsor your events and report with transparency and objectivity.
Metadata:
Entity: BridgeTower Media - Transom Capital Group d/b/a Missouri Lawyers Media
Google Business Profile / Knowledge Card: https://share.google/zhhleUURvzRgjXifK
Sign the petition and let Missouri Lawyers Media and other engineers of the Big Law Public Relations Industrial Complex know that the consumer finds such media manipulation contemptuous.
Below is the aforementioned Missouri Model Rules of Professional Conduct. - Missouri Lawyers Media is not a law firm and is not subject to the model rules. However, the attorneys, lawyers, and law firms who take advantage and are enriched by M.L.M are subject to the model rules. It would be well advised for M.LM. to adopt the "ethic theory" of the model rules in their journalistic business model in consideration of the public and consumer interest.
Missouri Supreme Court Rules (specifically Rules 4-7.1 through 4-7.5 of the Rules of Professional Conduct), attorney advertising and promotional claims—including awards, certifications, and badges—are strictly regulated.
While Missouri does not have a single rule titled "Vanity Awards," the display and promotion of commercial or pay-to-play legal honors are governed by Rule 4-7.1 (Communications Concerning a Lawyer's Services) and Rule 4-7.2 (Advertising):
Key Requirements Under Missouri Supreme Court Rules
1. Prohibitions on False or Misleading Claims (Rule 4-7.1)
A Missouri lawyer cannot make false or misleading statements about their qualifications or services. An award, badge, or ranking violates this rule if:
It implies unverified superiority: Advertising a title like "Top 10 Trial Attorney" or "Premier Legal Expert" is considered misleading unless it can be factually verified through objective, standardized criteria.
It creates unjustified expectations: Displaying commercial accolades that suggest guaranteed outcomes or elite standing based solely on paid fees rather than verified legal achievements creates an "unjustified expectation".
It omits material facts: Presenting a purchased badge or fee-based plaque as an objective peer-reviewed honor without disclosing the commercial nature of the award renders the communication materially misleading.
2. Prohibition on Paying for Recommendations (Rule 4-7.2(c))
Missouri Supreme Court Rule 4-7.2(c) states that a lawyer shall not give anything of value to a person or organization for recommending the lawyer's services.
If a directory or organization charges a fee in exchange for giving an attorney a favorable badge, ranking, or "endorsement," displaying it as a legitimate award can constitute paying for a recommendation in violation of state ethics rules.
3. Specialist and Certification Claims (Rule 4-7.4)
If an award or organization claims an attorney is a "certified specialist" or holds a specialty designation in a field of law, Missouri rules require strict disclaimers.
Missouri Supreme Court rules require attorneys to disclose that neither the Supreme Court of Missouri nor The Missouri Bar approves or reviews certifying organizations or specialist designations.
4. Mandatory Disclaimer (Rule 4-7.2(f))
Any website, advertisement, or public profile featuring attorney credentials or accolades must conspicuously display Missouri's required disclaimer:
"The choice of a lawyer is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements."
Review and subscribe to my consumer advocacy site and furthermore, tell of your story and experience with the legal industry.
Shout It Out Loud Org: https://shoutitoutloud.org
Jury-Watch Org: https://jury-watch.org
Albert B. Pepper Jr. d/b/a Phoenix Rising Productions LLC - A member in good standing of the Society of Professional Journalists, On-Line News Association, reporting
12
The Issue
The issue is transparency. The issue is "vanity awards". The issue is "Carpet Bagger" Law Firms. The issue is "Lottery Ticket" personal injury litigation and the selling of unjustified expectations. The illusion of legal competence and client first representation that is obscured by the "Big Law Public Relations Industrial Complex".
Consumers Beware: Both the Federal Trade Commission and the Missouri Supreme Court Rules (rule 4) have created consumer advisors and codified safe guards that the choice of an attorney should not be based solely upon advertisements.
Exhibit (a) - consumer.ftc.gov: https://consumer.ftc.gov/look-beyond-award-when-you-hire-lawyer#:~:text=When%20you%20do%2C%20you're%20likely%20to%20see,long%20has%20this%20award%20been%20in%20existence%3F
Exhibit (b) - For Missouri Supreme Court Model Rules of Professional Conduct see the bottom of this petition for the extensive enumerated citations and their application.
Though I make not statement of fact, this is what I, as a consumer have observed with regard to Missouri Lawyers Media and their prolific creation of "Award Categories" and "Award Ceremonies".
1) Create a category with a title such as : Power Litigator, Warrior Princess 2026, The Gold Standard Award, etc.
2) The award and event now requires both: a) sponsors and b) award candidate submissions.
What is observable is how often the same "big money" law firms sponsor these events and how often the attorneys and associates of these "big money" law firms are the award recipients"
The Simon Law Firm P.C. in St, Louis Missouri would be a primary example of this "pay for play" phenomenon. The link below is an up and coming event created by Missouri Lawyers Media and upon close examination you can identify the anomaly of how prolifically associates of the Simon Law Firm P.C. are presented. - It is a statistical anomaly.
3) Submissions for award candidates are made "stuffing the ballot box". A banquet or gala is held where the awards ceremony takes place including the paparazzi employed by Missouri Lawyers Media.
4) Missouri Lawyers Media publishes (as an objective news source) the winners of the prestigious awards of which Missouri Lawyers Media had created.
5) The sponsoring law firm and their associates who won the awards flood the social media landscape with these awards (which are not worth the tin they are made out of) creating an unjustified expectation in the mind of a consumer that the firm and associates are the compassionate, zealous advocates and winningest law firm.
6) Approximately every 30-45 days Missouri Lawyers Media repeats the cycle and the same group of "big money" law firms once again, are the sponsors of the event and anomalously the recipients of the awards.
Ladies and gentlemen, that is the "pay for play" game that we the consumer have been warned about.
Therefore, demand is made for Missouri Lawyers Media to 1) Dispense with these fraudulent award categories and ceremonies. 2) Democratize their awards and give "fan-fare to the common man. 3) Stop suppressing the negative news of the attorneys, lawyers and law firms that sponsor your events and report with transparency and objectivity.
Metadata:
Entity: BridgeTower Media - Transom Capital Group d/b/a Missouri Lawyers Media
Google Business Profile / Knowledge Card: https://share.google/zhhleUURvzRgjXifK
Sign the petition and let Missouri Lawyers Media and other engineers of the Big Law Public Relations Industrial Complex know that the consumer finds such media manipulation contemptuous.
Below is the aforementioned Missouri Model Rules of Professional Conduct. - Missouri Lawyers Media is not a law firm and is not subject to the model rules. However, the attorneys, lawyers, and law firms who take advantage and are enriched by M.L.M are subject to the model rules. It would be well advised for M.LM. to adopt the "ethic theory" of the model rules in their journalistic business model in consideration of the public and consumer interest.
Missouri Supreme Court Rules (specifically Rules 4-7.1 through 4-7.5 of the Rules of Professional Conduct), attorney advertising and promotional claims—including awards, certifications, and badges—are strictly regulated.
While Missouri does not have a single rule titled "Vanity Awards," the display and promotion of commercial or pay-to-play legal honors are governed by Rule 4-7.1 (Communications Concerning a Lawyer's Services) and Rule 4-7.2 (Advertising):
Key Requirements Under Missouri Supreme Court Rules
1. Prohibitions on False or Misleading Claims (Rule 4-7.1)
A Missouri lawyer cannot make false or misleading statements about their qualifications or services. An award, badge, or ranking violates this rule if:
It implies unverified superiority: Advertising a title like "Top 10 Trial Attorney" or "Premier Legal Expert" is considered misleading unless it can be factually verified through objective, standardized criteria.
It creates unjustified expectations: Displaying commercial accolades that suggest guaranteed outcomes or elite standing based solely on paid fees rather than verified legal achievements creates an "unjustified expectation".
It omits material facts: Presenting a purchased badge or fee-based plaque as an objective peer-reviewed honor without disclosing the commercial nature of the award renders the communication materially misleading.
2. Prohibition on Paying for Recommendations (Rule 4-7.2(c))
Missouri Supreme Court Rule 4-7.2(c) states that a lawyer shall not give anything of value to a person or organization for recommending the lawyer's services.
If a directory or organization charges a fee in exchange for giving an attorney a favorable badge, ranking, or "endorsement," displaying it as a legitimate award can constitute paying for a recommendation in violation of state ethics rules.
3. Specialist and Certification Claims (Rule 4-7.4)
If an award or organization claims an attorney is a "certified specialist" or holds a specialty designation in a field of law, Missouri rules require strict disclaimers.
Missouri Supreme Court rules require attorneys to disclose that neither the Supreme Court of Missouri nor The Missouri Bar approves or reviews certifying organizations or specialist designations.
4. Mandatory Disclaimer (Rule 4-7.2(f))
Any website, advertisement, or public profile featuring attorney credentials or accolades must conspicuously display Missouri's required disclaimer:
"The choice of a lawyer is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements."
Review and subscribe to my consumer advocacy site and furthermore, tell of your story and experience with the legal industry.
Shout It Out Loud Org: https://shoutitoutloud.org
Jury-Watch Org: https://jury-watch.org
Albert B. Pepper Jr. d/b/a Phoenix Rising Productions LLC - A member in good standing of the Society of Professional Journalists, On-Line News Association, reporting
The Decision Makers
Supporter Voices
Petition Updates
Share this petition
Petition created on September 10, 2026