Point Counter Point; Ashley/Sze on KGO; Zouves and Aqui; Sal Castaneda; KQED; 415 Media; Michael Savage

POINT: YOU'RE KIDDING, RIGHT, you ridicule Kristen Sze for her petulant behavior now you're going to plug her and Dan Ashley as an anchor team.

Counter-Point: Well, I didn't actually ridicule Kristen, I was just reporting what I was given from reliable people who worked at KGO. Look, some of the best artists (and anchors are artists too in a way) can be difficult to work with. They tend to want to be perfect. I'm not saying Kristen is perfect but the more I watch her the more I'm impressed --in fact, her and Dan Ashley make a terrific team. Who knew? I'm watching the KGO 5PM newscast and that wasn't always on my radar.

POINT: Speaking of KGO, you readily rip into Natasha Zouves; she's not that bad, in fact she's quite good, why all the rancor?

Counter-Point: Look, I can't stand the drama and fakeness; Natasha doesn't come across as sincere. I may be totally wrong, in fact, she might be a really good person, but I can't handle her on the air. I'll give her this, she has to work with that moron, Reggie Aqui, so maybe I should cut her more slack.

POINT: What's your issues with Reggie (Aqui); seems pretty competent; he's just doing his job.

Counter-Point: Yeah, and that's pretty much the problem. I have never liked this guy to begin with; he's totally unprofessional, a fake and another phony. I couldn't care less about his personal life; to each is own, it's the manner in which he carries himself. He's an insult and a narcissist and he embarrasses himself and the station every day. Other than that, he's fine.

POINT: You ripped pretty good into your friend, Sal Castaneda, why all the vitriol? 

Counter-Point: I thought Sal was being too big-headed and acting like a jerk; his on-air persona has changed to a point where I believed he was portraying someone he really isn't. And I called him out. Look, I have issues in my life now (duh!) but I try my best to be as sincere as possible. I don't think Sal is being genuine now but maybe he's having some issues himself.

POINT: KQED is one of the most cherished media institutions in the Bay Area.

Counter-Point: Well, they used to be. Now, they're just like a commercial station looking to make as much money as possible which is OK if they only admitted it and got off their bullshit PBS/NPR pedestal. They come off as this pristine broadcast entity and they're not; their programming, most of which isn't locally produced, comes from back east and doesn't have an ounce of KQED involvement in it; they used to do a TON of local shows and now all they do is a few tokens, what a joke.

POINT: A lot of people complain about your frequent donation requests. Fair question?

Counter-Point: No, not at all and I'm about to flip my lid...look, I WORK EXTREMELY hard at this. Every day and evening. I don't claim it to be a Picasso, by no means, but I do the best I can under some less than ideal circumstances. The main thing is this: in order for this blog to keep on, keepin' on, I need financial support. I can't and WON'T do it as a hobby because like the rest of you, I have bills too. I've never forced anyone to contribute --but I can't continue to keep doing it without help. I'm just being up front. So I can either shut it down or now and then do a pledge break and ask for donations. I have a pretty good readership and hope soon someone (people) that can afford it step to the plate and make 415 Media sustainable without me having to ask for money. Fair enough.

POINT: You really are very hard on Gasia Mikaelian. How much is too much?

Counter-Point: I have nothing personal against Gasia; she just bugs the hell out of me with her act, and it's an act. She has NO regard for KTVU and its legacy. Granted it's nothing like it used to be but Gasia's antics are an insult to all the hard-working people at KTVU that still care about the station. I know Fox makes it imperative you act like their Fox gestalt but Gasia goes way overboard. And I'm going to call her out as long as I'm here.

POINT: Why do you support Michael Savage?

Counter-Point: Because he's entertaining and offers something different than the usual ho-hum alternatives. I don't always agree with him but I hardly agreed with Lee Rodgers and I still loved to listen to Lee because he was so damn interesting. Savage makes me laugh and that's difficult because I'm tough. That's not in anyway shape or form saying he's my cup and tea every moment, but who is? This is such a crazy world, we need a Savage and I'm all for that. Today at least.