Talk:Hill & Knowlton

message: The lead section to this article does not appear to follow best practice cited in Wikipedia:Lead_section#Introductory_text. It does not explain why the topic is noteworthy. I would suggest something along the following lines:
Hill & Knowlton is a global public relations company, headquartered in New York, United States, with 79 offices in 44 countries. Hill & Knowlton was founded in Cleveland, Ohio in 1927 by John W. Hill and is today led by Chairman & CEO, Paul Taaffe. It is owned by the WPP Group.
There should probably also be an Template:Infobox_company here, shouldn't there?
References for the above changes include [], [], [] and [], for example.
Niall Cook (Hill & Knowlton) (talk) 12:07, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Done. Happy to add an infobox if you want to draft one. THF (talk) 17:58, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks. Trying this:
Niall Cook (Hill & Knowlton) (talk) 18:31, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed change #1: Lead section 

message: The structure of this article remains very POV, focusing only on alleged controversial client engagements, the majority of which date from 20 or even 50 years ago. I would suggest the following structure:
- History (some material can be found at [])
- Notable clients
-- Key clients (these are regularly reported on. See [])
-- Controversies (most of the existing sections could be moved to this section)
- Corporate
-- Awards (see those I suggested on 24 February at Talk:Hill_%26_Knowlton#Notable_Clients)
-- Mergers & Acquisitions (On 15 November, the merger of Hill & Knowlton and Public Strategies Inc. was announced: [])
I am more than happy to propose these as specific changes if required.
Niall Cook (Hill & Knowlton) (talk) 12:07, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: Please do. THF (talk) 18:15, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed change #2: Sections 

message: Large parts of this look like a POV hatchet job against this firm. The allegations should be sourced. Use of the word propaganda is highly charged and statements like Since the 1930s, public relations and propaganda have merged into a profitable business reek of POV. Please do not remove templates until this is resolved. --JJay 14:32, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: The controversies section still reads very POV.  Any way to add citations to this section? Pnkrockr 15:52, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  POV 

message: It turns out that weeks before the Congressional Human Rights Caucus took place the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie, told Saddam Hussein that the United States would have no objections to Iraq invading Kuwait. It wasn't until Hill & Knowlton's orchistrated PR campaign that Americans accepted the Gulf War. If only someone could find a quote or cite of the two speaking together. This seems important, but isn't large enough for its own page. -Drunkentune 18:41, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: UPDATED

message: Does anybody know what happened as a result of Hill & Knowlton and the Kuwaiti ambassador's daughter lying to congress?  Isn't that a felony?  Was Hill & Knowlton charged, shut down, and all employees thrown behind bars?  Any one with any info as to what happened as a result, please add this much relevant info to the article.  If they got away scot-free with committing a felony this should be there too.  Article is not supposed to be a promotion piece of Hill & Knowlton or whatever the topic of articles.  Satfurn 11:35, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Criminal charges?

message: Hill & Knowlton was hired by London City Airport in 2008, this was part of it asking for planning permission to increase flights from 76,000 to 120,000. The airport is located in a sensitive residential area and it was only ever meant to be a small exclusive business airport serving the business community of Canary Wharf (similar to Wall Street).
Residents suffer from noise and aviation fuel fumes. 
Although, it would be reasonable for London City Airport to hire a PR company to represent their view, but Hill & Knowlton & London City Airport have done everything to break "democracy" in the area. For instance, newspaper reports only put airport's side of the claim on why they should expand. For instance, London City Airport put adverts in the local paper Newham Recorder (and a few surrounding area), just so that they get favourable reporting. Even the name of the residen't campaign group Fight the Flights was not mentioned. Even though the airprot is is breach of the law for not carrying out any noise monitoring since 2000, but the local paper has made no mention of this!.
Hill & Knowlton & London City Airport have a "cosy" relationship with the Newham local Councillors, not ONE of the Councillors for spoke up for the residents to stop expansion at London City Airport. Some of our Councillors got free flights! Thank you for breaking democracy in the local area!
Hill & Knowlton even met up with the Mayor of London, to make a "cosy" relationship.
Hill & Knowlton have no scrupples, they have been peddling lies about how good the airport is for the local economy, never mind all the jobs that were NOT created. For instance in the  Royal Docks Business Park (Building 1000). A newly built 252 Square feet 5 storey building that remained empty 5 years. I mean who wants to have their corporate offices next a busy runway and toxic aviation fumes?
It is hard enough to fight a big corporate, but Hill & Knowlton have done disgusts me, I have no idea how their people can sleep at night!
89.240.62.252 (talk) 12:31, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: If you have reliable, independent sources and can establish notability, your concerns could be addressed in the article.  Otherwise, this is purely WP:OR. --Nouniquenames (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 06:00, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  London City Airport - contraversial client 

message: Sounds noteworthy, however, the link is broken. I read in the John R. MacArthur book "Second Front: Censorship and Propaganda in the 1991 Gulf War" that Hill&Knowlton had also worked for other internationally criticized regimes before the Kuwait affair. If I remember correctly it was Turkey and Myanmar, maybe China. Someone can check? Knopffabrik (talk) 13:54, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maldives 

message: This source mentions "The man running Hill & Knowlton's Washington office was Craig
Fuller, one of Bush's closest friends and inside political advisors." He was "chief of staff to Bush when he was vice-president". "Wirthlin Group, research arm of H&K, was the pollster for the Reagan Administration." "Hill & Knowlton senior vice-
president Thomas Ross had been Pentagon spokesman during the Carter Administration." "To manage the news media, H&K relied on vice-
chairman Frank Mankiewicz, whose background included service as press secretary and advisor to Robert F. Kennedy and George McGovern, followed by a stint as president of National Public Radio." Is there more information on connections to the government? Knopffabrik (talk) 18:06, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Try to use reliable sources, please. It's hardly surprising or sinister that government officials who specialized in communications when they were with the government go into the same field when they leave government. THF (talk) 22:39, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The extent in this case seems surprising. And you cannot deny that the US government, which listed the millions of dollars paid to the company, is kind of a reliable source. The fact that Craig L. Fuller, chief of staff during George Bush's vice presidency, was named president and chief executive of the public relations firm's US operations in 1991 was also reported by the LA Times. Knopffabrik (talk) 23:23, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no objection to including the LA Times reporting in the article. I object to the conspiracy theory or synthesis you propose. THF (talk) 01:37, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I have no conspiracy theory, just want to report about the number of people who had high positions in US governments and at H&K. Knopffabrik (talk) 17:08, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Connections to government 

message: "The PR company was also criticised for editing the statements on the country’s wikipedia entry critical of the former government, after was caught in the act by data-mining tool Wikiscanner."  I think this deserves its own section. Knopffabrik (talk) 22:43, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Minivannews is not a reliable source.  Find a reliable source, and then we can consider the WP:UNDUE issues, since a single employee's actions on something this minor probably don't merit a full section on a decades-old company whose article is so short.  In the meantime, you'll demonstrate that you're here to help the encyclopedia, rather than to push an outside agenda if you aren't so blatantly pushing a particular point of view--why stretch so hard to include Minivannews when there are numerous books and NY Times articles about the company that haven't yet been added? Please adhere to the WP:NPOV policy. THF (talk) 22:47, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you very much for improving the links. I am not so familiar with advanced reference specifications. I however cannot quite follow you about removing the news reports. Just because you do not know or like them does not mean they cannot be used here. Probably you just don't know any Maldivian news source. And Al Jazeera is one of the most used sources in the Arab world. There is references using Murdoch media as well, would you say it's not neutral then either? Even if it wasn't neutral, as long as you have no legitimate doubt about factual accuracy of the information that the reference is used for you should not just remove it. You are welcome to use others. Knopffabrik (talk) 23:07, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I presume by the fact that you used unreliable sources that the information could not be found in reliable sources. Alternet is not a reliable source. Minivannews is not a reliable source. Al Jazeera is not a reliable source. If the underlying reporting is true, it should be found in reliable sources. If the underlying reporting cannot be found in reliable sources, it's a very good indication that Al Jazeera--which does not adhere to generally accepted journalistic principles or fact-checking--got things factually wrong. THF (talk) 01:37, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Just because you do not like them does not mean they are not reliable. As I already told you, the fact that Bush used the incubator lie in many speeches can be read in other sources, too, like in the op-ed by John R. MacArthur already cited. And please show me how US media double checked when they made the US public believe that Iraq was behind 9/11 and had weapons of mass destruction. How did they double check when the lie about babies taken out of incubators was sold to them by Hill & Knowlton? Unless you have clear reasons why not to accept the references, they stay. Knopffabrik (talk) 17:05, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Here's a solution, from someone unfamiliar with the page (and, therefore, neutral and unbiased).  There are two sources to the segment.  Kinbidhooonline is unreachable, and the other has been called into question.  Having never heard of that second source, let's turn it around backwards (especially since POV is an issue here). Knopffabrik, if it means that much to you, please find a source that would be accepted in a more widespread audience (as the audience of Wikipedia tends to be) and reinstate the information.  I looked long and hard, and could not find a reliable source, only blogs, wiki mirrors, etc.  I feel compelled to remove it per WP:RS until a reliable source can be found.  --Nouniquenames (talk) 05:43, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Corporate Minion was kind enough to point out a reliable source showing that the editing took place and was notable enough to be published.  I added this back in.  --Nouniquenames (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 16:15, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  alleged spin using wikipedia 

message: As this edit reveals, the IP 194.242.55.7 is used by Niall Cook who works for the PR firm Hill & Knowlton and keeps contributing to this discussion. On top of obscene vandalism, the IP was found to use wikipedia for whitewashing the government of the Maldives that had hired his firm for improving its reputation that had been harmed by human rights violations.     Using the wiki-tool of a whois search, one can find that all IPs in the range of 194.242.55.0 - 194.242.55.255 belong to Hill & Knowlton.Knopffabrik (talk) 18:09, 14 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It's no secret that I work for the firm or contribute to this discussion, or that I follow Wikipedia's guidance on Conflict of Interest editing. That information is already available to anyone on my user page. Niall Cook (Hill & Knowlton) (talk) 13:06, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: As you know, it will be new to most users that the IP you use and that can be tracked back to your company was found to have been used for manipulating articles related to a dictator who paid your company. Knopffabrik (talk) 13:13, 17 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  PR firm used wikipedia as a service to its customers - user still editing 

message: Here is the AfC submission I had turned down as "Exists." The submission had been repeatedly declined for being promotional, however at a quick glance there are some key facts that could be added:
*Add C-level execs to the Key People section of the infobox template (currently unused I think)
:Jack Martin, Global Chairman and CEO
:Ken Luce, Global COO
:Meredith Marks, Global General Counsel
:Mark Bunker, Global CFO
* Add to the lead: The agency is part of WPP.
* Add to history: In 1946, Hill and Knowlton dissolved their partnership and Knowlton took over the direction of Hill & Knowlton Cleveland, which closed shortly after Knowlton’s retirement in 1962.[Knowlton, Donald Snow - The Encyclopedia of Cleveland History: http://ech.case.edu/ech-cgi/article.pl?id=KDS] 
* In 1952, Hill established a network of affiliates across Europe.[Timetoast-History of Hill and Knowlton Public Relations: http://www.timetoast.com/timelines/history-of-hill-and-knowlton-public-relations] Hill & Knowlton was acquired by JWT Group Inc. in 1980. In 1987, JWT was acquired by WPP Group.  
:User:Corporate Minion 19:22, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: WPP are mentioned, most people will probably know who they are, but we should not puff them.  As for the execs, I'll leave that to someone else.  Rich Farmbrough, 13:37, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Revised User:Corporate Minion 16:05, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Oh I see, it is there already. User:Corporate Minion 17:06, 2 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contributions from HIll & Knowlton 

message: In writing on the History of public relations I came across this source, an entire book about Hill & Knowlton in the post-war era which could really help balance this page. Apparently they were the first major US firm to create a strong international network. CorporateM (Talk) 01:06, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Source 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Hill+Knowlton Strategies. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140822053525/http://www.hkstrategies.com/global-presence to http://www.hkstrategies.com/global-presence
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150403032526/http://www.saudigazette.com.sa/index.cfm?method=home.regcon&contentid=20131121187309 to http://www.saudigazette.com.sa/index.cfm?method=home.regcon&contentid=20131121187309
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140209132004/http://www.hkstrategies.com/services to http://www.hkstrategies.com/services
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:54, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Just a shade on the POV side, wouldn't you say?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.89.93.165 (talk) 02:18, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  "ever-litigious Church of Scientology" 

message: Please update the current Chairman and CEO to AnnaMaria DeSalva, as shown on H+K's website and covered by media.
2A01:4B00:82E1:3500:A83F:FA2A:B4E5:A0B1 (talk) 12:15, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Update the CEO and Chairman 

message: You might want to consider adding in:
- H&K was, in the 1970s at least, considered the largest public relations firm in the world and the agency of choice for the blue chips.
- The firm was one of the very few that refused to solicit clients/new business.  Rather: Clients solicited H&K.  H&K’s top brass would determine which clients to do business with.
- H&K for years had a stellar reputation.
— Look up the names of former leadership.  Some are to this day considered the best in the profession.
I’m not going to spend the time looking for sourcing on this but I’m sure you could find verification of these points.  And as one who was there… Pete NY PHX (talk) 01:52, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  For Consideration