Talk:Hugh Hewitt
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Biography Sourcing
I am surprised that all of these unsourced CV points remain here. Tone and content are typical of a Hewitt publicist. One most obvious example is the idea that the RMN Library job came "at the request" of the former president. Further, there is no source whatsoever for any of these purported high government jobs. This stuff needs to be sourced or removed.
This site needs to stop being used as a publicity front for corporate interests.
JerryGraf (talk) 18:59, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
I have made what I regard as generous edits in the biography. I am leaving the major elements intact, compensating for the absence of sourcing by asserting that these bio points are claims of the subject. I also clarified that the AG has more than one Special Assistant, and that the Office of Personnel Management, has more than one deputy.
JerryGraf (talk) 01:19, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
- I've matched the Reagan administration claims with the abstract citation provided. (The pdf link on the citation does not work). Once again, happy to replace these bio points once properly sourced. I would add however, that Mr. Hewitt's "career" in the Reagan "White House" merits skepticism. Even if the claims are believed, he held four jobs inside of four years in three different departments ending ultimately, in a fringe government HR job.
JerryGraf (talk) 12:56, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Michigan, Harvard, Ratings
207.200.116.137 (talk · contribs), would you mind offering some sources for these edits? The first claim is extremely subjective and vague, and the second needs qualification and data to back it up. The third is probably okay. android79 23:54, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
...and we have more of the same changes without any discussion or sources, including one that describes Hewitt's blog as "centrist," which is patently absurd. Please justify these changes here or I will continue to revert them. android79 16:30, 24 October 2005 (UTC)
...and again... android79 01:21, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
- I agree; these changes should be reverted. He refers more often to the University of Michigan than Harvard. I'd bet the second was true based on his periodic bashing of one of his LA competitors. The third is true, but I haven't seen any source for that. I think that his claim about being the smartest guy on radio is advertisement for his show and is inappropriate for wiki. And Hewitt's not "centrist", although he called himself "center-right" the other day when talking to a high school sophomore about the guest speakers he had in geography class. Sophy's Duckling 17:46, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
-
- The reverts were generally correct; he refers to both Michigan and Harvard a lot, KRLA's ratings (being a 5000 watt station up against a couple of 50,000 watt blowtorches) are lower in general, and his "smartest guy in radio" claim is hyperbole intended to poke at his competition.
-
- However, as re "center-right" - That has been a consistent theme of Hugh's for years, and in fact has been a motif several of his books. It might be worth a mention on its own terms. I may write that shortly.
Mitchberg 18:32, 5 March 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- I hardly see how much he refers to his almae matres and that he says he's the smartest guy on radio is relevent, though. they were added by (given the tone of the edits) someone who disapproves of Hugh Hewitt and thinks that he's an egotist of gigantic proportions. The second thing about the competition is relevent (I think), but we don't have a verifiable source yet. Sophy's Duckling
-
-
-
-
- I may not have been clear enough; I do not feel that the college references or his self-proclaimed intelligence are relevant at all - that's just standard radio smack-talk, not encyclopedic information.
-
-
-
-
-
- I agree, the edits are from someone who doesn't like Hewitt. I'm probably the opposite, of course - Hugh is a friend.
- I can find a source re the ratings, although those are so transitory as to be hardly worth including...
- Mitchberg 23:45, 8 March 2006 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] Guests and Cast
I broke out Hugh's regular guests, cast/crew, and regulars into a separate section.
Mitchberg 01:25, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
I think David Allen White should be included as a regular, although he appears only about once a month. (Professor of World Literature at the Naval Academy)
[edit] Criticism
-
-
- Shouldn't the criticism he's received from conservative weblogs, especially during the Harriet Miers controversy, be included as part of this article?
-
72.68.191.88 22:46, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
- It certainly could be included.
- Expect counterpoint!
- Mitchberg 18:41, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] minnesota
could someone tell me what hugh hewitt beat michael medved in? something aobut minnesota? AeomMai (talk · contribs)
- Hm. He and Medved were in a trivia contest at a PR appearance at a bar in Minneapolis where, if memory serves, Hewitt's team beat Medved's team. Not really encyclopedic...
- Mitchberg 16:13, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Blogging
The section on Hugh Hewitts blogging (which somehow manage to avoid actually talking about his blog) is incredibly weak. For one thing "new media" has absolutely nothing to do with conservatism. It is just as much a liberal movement, and to say it is conservative marginalizes Hewitts contribution to blogging. If someone could find a confirmed source for the year he started blogging that would also go a long way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.115.126.82 (talk • contribs) 00:34, 19 September 2006
- Quite true. Thanks, 65.115.126.82, for pointing that out. Would you like to have a try at expanding that section yourself? Feel free to edit the article itself; if you make any mistakes, someone else will (almost certainly) edit them out. Or you can write your ideas here. Cheers, CWC(talk) 08:50, 19 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Nixon Library
In a Slate.com article today (Jan. 31, 2007 http://www.slate.com/id/2158699/) by highly respected presidential historian David Greenberg (http://www.scils.rutgers.edu/~davidgr/) himself a Nixon scholar, Prof. Greenberg states that Hewitt was fired from the Nixon Library due to the controversial policy of vetting scholars based on pro-Nixon views. The wikipedia entry that "Hewitt left" the Library is, therefore, dubious and misleading based on this very reliable source. Revision should be strongly considered. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.102.12.73 (talk • contribs) 20:04, 31 January 2007 UTC
- Hmm. That opinion piece claims that "Bush has, like the most facile Postmodernists, denigrated the expertise of long-standing authorities, deeming their claims to authority mere masks for a political agenda", so Prof Greenberg is not making any pretense of neutrality. The only mention of HH is this:
- When Hugh Hewitt, the original director of the Nixon Library, said he would screen and bar insufficiently pro-Nixon researchers, he was countermanded and sacked. The SMU administration, in contrast, ...
- My feeling is that this offhand remark in a highly-slanted opinion piece is not a reliable enough source to meet the requirements of WP:BLP. What do other editors think? CWC(talk) 11:47, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Professor
In his show he says he is a professor of constitutional law, and he sometimes discusses what he is teaching his students... this should be mentioned... where does he teach? myclob 03:02, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
- He teaches at Chapman University School of Law. I've just edited the article accordingly. Does anyone know when Hewitt joined the faculty there? CWC 10:05, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Morning glory, evening grace
Hugh greets his callers with this exchange, which appears to be unique to his show. Anyone know the origins of this phrase, and its meaning? — Loadmaster 14:56, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
- A little Googling turned up this explanation on a web newgroup:
- Hugh used to be on in the mornings. He had a regular caller who would say "Morning glory, Hugh!" Hugh then adopted that as his intro. Then he moved the show to afternoon drive, and he had a contest with his listeners to come up with a suitable counterpart to "morning glory," and thus was born "evening grace."
- So I guess this is the most likely explanation of the origin of the phrase. — Loadmaster 15:41, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

