If you believe this crap, then fine, I've got some spectacular bridge front property to sell you.
Here's the NO SPIN truth: Michael Krasny, the Forum host, was FORCED out of his gig.
Plain and simple.
They would want you to believe that he simply "retired", and for a man in his early 70's and approaching his sunset years, that would be all well and good.
But the truth? No. And BS en fuego.
Krasny has done a relatively good job at KQED and he's broadcast some mostly excellent shows but again, he was forced out. In a below-the-radar move, it was evident, the powers-that-be at KQED determined that Krasny was no longer needed at the local NPR aff; that he was deemed too old and that he was being shown the door because they (the high suit tops) were done telling him how wonderful he was and looking for someone younger, maybe a woman (my bet) and a person who would re-energize KQED's audio girth in the morning.
Krasny was dealt a simple playing card: go away now and we'll provide you a nice golden parachute and departing gift. It's been a behind-the-scenes effort for sometime now. Only because KQED decided to play hard ball and didn't figure that Krasny would bark back "no."
Until Krasny contacted an attorney, did KQED and its hardened suits decide that they'd offer him a sweetheart retirement package and several thousands of dollars to announce a "retirement" did he (Krasny) OK it and play nice.
Krasny was a significant KQED artifact and arguably its most prized on-air asset but he was beginning to fray from the action. His dealings with people behind the scenes and those that would fill in when he was away, caused considerable strain within the KQED back offices and for Krasny himself. Strained relationships, especially when it involves female broadcasters, is not something that is relished, especially in today's "Me Too" environment. That last entity was not the emphasis behind Krasny leaving but it was significant nonetheless.
Krasny will continue to write and lecture. He's good at that and has many years in the tank to accomplish such acts. He could have continued at KQED and garner the kind of broadcast acumen; his ability to get noted guests; authors, politicians, erudite scholars and the like were perennial public-radio, left-centric Bay Area favorites.
But by no means did Krasny "retire", he was simply told to go away. And that's not such a bad deal only it's the truth.
Why I would've never send $$ to KQED when I lived in the Bay Area. Too many pledge begging and some other stuff about the station.
ReplyDelete> he was being shown the door because they
ReplyDelete> (the high suit tops) were done telling him
> how wonderful he was and looking for someone
> younger, maybe a woman (my bet)
A woman of color, probably with a name like Shaquilla Yolanda Jackson-X.
Not exactly "early 70's." He's 76. Deserves to go out on his own terms and I'm sure he did.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if Krasny was sticking around because he simply needs to work/the money? I left the TV news business 15-years ago, for a state job that offers a pension. When I worked in TV, I never really saved any money for retirement--other than my 401K, which I foolishly only contributed 2% each paycheck (hey, the Bay Area is expensive--I needed every penny from each paycheck!) I was stunned to learn that pretty much all of my colleagues were also "living large" and not really saving for retirement! I'm willing to bet that most reporters, producers, writers, photogs, & editors are also not putting away enough for retirement.
ReplyDeleteKrasny was a long-time (multiple decades) professor of English Lit at SF State University, so no matter how large he lived -- and probably not very, since that's not his style -- he has his pension from CALSTRS, the state teachers' retirement system. I doubt he's ever going to be reduced to buying cans of cat food to survive.
ReplyDeleteAs someone who actually worked with Krasny, he is well liked and a gentleman. Most of his producers are women and never had a problem with him. He treated everyone well. He is not an egomaniac. Mina Kim who has been his fill in will likely be his successor. She's been groomed for the role for many years and is extremely talented and intelligent.
ReplyDeleteNek’s truth is too boring, where are the scandal possibilities?
ReplyDeleteHe's 76 -- 11 years past retirement age
ReplyDeleteIs there any TV anchor or major radio personality still working in the Bay Area at that age? It's no scandal to retire when you are pushing 80.