June 19, 2007
A Face Made for Radio, II
Those of you who listen to Hugh Hewitt on the radio can catch me this evening at 6:40 p.m. EST.
Update: They're pushing my segment to 7:40 p.m. EST. You can also catch me with John Steigerwald on Pittsburgh's 93.7 FM tomorrow at 9:20 a.m. EST. I believe you can listen live on the Internet. If you're interested in how I might humiliate myself on a station that calls itself "The Man Station," that is.
Posted by Woodlief on June 19, 2007 at 02:06 PM


I heard most of your interview and I find it to be a very important issue in our society. I am an educator in a Title I public school and will be conducting research in the coming school year on the motivation of boys reading in the 3rd grade. Part of my preliminary research has been studying the crisis that boys of all ages are currently part of. As part of the research project I will be making recommendations on how to promote engagement and encouragement for boys with literacy. Some of my initial recommendations revolve around adult males in our homes taking an active role in modeling literacy to their boys. If young boys see their fathers, grandfathers, uncles, etc. reading newspapers, magazines, and books our boys will be more apt to become interested in reading. Our boys need strong male models in their lives and I applaud men and women who have the courage to stand up against current trends. I look forward to reading comments here about your interview and listeners perceptions of this important issue. KH
Posted by: Kimberly Howland at June 19, 2007 7:51 PM

I'm surprised that Hewitt, who regards himself as a master of the blogosphere, wasn't familiar with your site. You must be keeping too low of a profile. Or perhaps you're just not political enough. In any event, great job. You sounded just fine.
Posted by: jim naso at June 20, 2007 9:05 AM

I missed most of the interview on radio, but Jim's comment about your host's love for politics rings true, especially these days.
It was coincidental that WSJ Work and Family ran an article about fathers and reading and talking to children that supports what Ms. Howard writes in her remarks above. Specifically, the column makes a point that fathers' time with children is a vocabulary expander in that they tend to use more complex words and structure sentences in a more deliberate way than mothers often do. I imagined the comparison to be between "and this is your shoey-woo-we" versus "well son, what do you think about this backhoe's hydraulic bucket extension?" But even when I thought seriously the WSJ article makes sense. Men do tend to speak up to their kids, and that's decidedly a good thing.
My father lost his dad when he was three, but had a sister and brother old enough to have known the man and been able to share lots of things. He was raised by a overbearing mother, pampered and somewhat indulged but managed to do a pretty good job exposing his two sons to the world of work.
He was a reader. His continuing love was for Kipling and he owned a set of soft leather bound volumes that unfortunately got away from me. Captains Couregeous, Starky & Company. And he loved a movie made at the tail end of WWII, "They Were Expendable" that remains one of my favorites.
With respect to the questions you ask in your WSJ column last week, I suggest you get videos of John Wayne in The Cowboys, Red River, and The Shootist - and watch them with your kids. Likely the best training for young men and their fathers that exists.
Except for the books.
Posted by: Ken at June 20, 2007 10:53 AM

Post a comment