Clicker.com, the website that brought me this experience, worthless but for the 15 second pre-roll commercial now buried somewhere in the part of my brain that might buy things, has been acquired by CBS this morning and its leader will now run the Interactive division (the future) of one of the biggest media companies in the world.

I'm sure he's a very capable executive and here's the supportive way to articulate the significance of the news: a respected internet leader will now be charged with helping move into a new, unknown and disruptive technology economy a large, century old institution, rich with accumulated history and talent for creating high-production content that speaks to hundreds of millions of people. Think about 60 Minutes getting support on the Internet, as all things move to the Internet.

A less charitable take on the news: a man who's spent the last several years working on a Facebook Instant Personalization-powered collection of instantly watchable online video, the vast majority of which probably ought not ever have been made at all, will now run CBS. A man who helped bring the cultural sedative of mainstream TV to the glorious frontier of the Internet will now be in charge of extending that winning recipe of shimmering vacuousness made web-friendly to a much larger audience.

Life's too short to spend precious time watching How I Met Your Mother, folks, whether on TV or online. It makes me laugh too, and if you're watching it with someone you love that's one thing; but when we looked out from the dawn of the Web and imagined it winning - this sure wasn't what many of us imagined it bringing into our lives, was it?

Will it matter? In a news environment that has been irrevocably disrupted by the Internet, the role of broadcast news anchors has evolved out of necessity. Their ability to focus international awareness on the key issues of our time remains unparalleled, but the attention span and consumption habits of their audience has changed.

And so the question becomes: How will one of the nation's most familiar faces and sources for news will adapt, adopt and become adept in the context of a news cycle that refreshes as often as a click on a Web browser? By the time Couric presents the 22 minutes of news as CBS's anchor each evening, the Web has long since digested, analyzed and commented upon each item. There are few scoops by 6:30 p.m. Eastern.

The networks are responding to the challenges posed by the shift online after years of false starts. You can already see, for instance, how the PBS Newshour has shifted to a new format. The Newshour integrates updates social media and a blog posts through out the day with the traditional hour of news in the evening. A digital correspondent, Hari Sreenivasan, breaks down what's available online to Newhour viewers on air. Couric has joined Twitter, distributed video podcasts in iTunes, published Web-first video to CBSNews.com and launched an iPhone app. Below, Couric talks about using social media:

The New News, Digital Literacy and Filter Bubbles

Perhaps because of those efforts, Couric chose not to frame new and old media as oppositional in delivering relevant information to citizens. "New and old media can coexist and the two can add up to a richer product," she said. "Stories bubble up. They start to incubate on the Web," said Couric, alluding to the reality of newsrooms on using the Internet as barometer for news.

It's in the self interest of those same networks to support a more educated citizenry with greater digital literacy. "Be an educated consumer" when buying into the media, said Couric. That extends to actively seeking and engaging with views and perspectives that do not mesh comfortably with our own, a phenomenon that Eli Pariser described at PDF earlier this year as the "filter bubble." Living in an information bubble with like-minded people is both "limiting and dangerous to a democracy," said Couric.

That's one reason that the Knight Commission was created, and why the information needs of this democracy must be considered as technology continues to evolve as a means of collaborative news gathering, sharing and analysis.

Katie Couric speaking at Web 2.0 Expo NY 2010. Photo by James Duncan Davidson.

In that context, she quoted one of the sages of Washington, Senator Daniel Patrick Moynihan, who famously said that "everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." To say that there is some dispute over different versions of reality in Washington today would be a grand understatement, given the truthiness that's endemic to many conversations.

What she needs, along with the rest of the press corps and the citizenry they serve, are better filters for getting to the news that matters, separating signal from noise. "I'd love to find a way to better consume all the info coming my way," she said. "Sometimes I feel like I'm drowning in a tsunami of news."

I know the feeling. That's why learning how to focus is crucial, and embracing selectivity alongside critical thinking are useful skills in modern life, as Clay Johnson has pointed out at InfoVegan.com. His recommendations for dealing with information overload include consuming information consciously, practicing "attention fitness," and breathing to avoid email apnea.

As Couric and the other anchors embrace these new tools, their ability to develop those skills in order to be educated on what matters is the best bet for them to be on top of what they need to share with to the rest of world. That's why I asked her about her own "information diet," drawing from the fascinating profiles of media diets that the Atlantic has been posting this year.

So What Does She Read?

"I love The Economist because it gives a very unbiased, across the pond view," said Couric. She also listed off The New York Times, The Washington Post and USA Today in print, and online destinations like the Drudge Report, the Huffington Post and (surprise) CBSNews.com. Like me, she has "stacks of New Yorkers" in the house, along with The Atlantic.

The open question for Couric will be in whether she can leverage new media to reach new audiences and break through the information overload. Her questions to former Alaska governor Sarah Palin were unquestionably a factor in the 2008 election. The network anchors will continue to play a role in holding policy makers and presidential candidates accountable, because of their access. But the days of towering figures like Cronkite, Brinkley, Chancellor, Brokaw or Jennings letting the nation know "the way it is" are over. They are undoubtedly a major element of shaping an ever-evolving global conversation but no longer control it nor define it.

If there's one take-away from Couric's time at Web 2.0, it's that we now all to some degree have a shared responsibility to get the facts right. Here's hoping that in the service of our collective intelligence that we all do.

According to CBSi's SVP and GM of entertainment, Anthony Soohoo, CBS.com plans to reach HTML5 parity with the plugin-based Flash video, but is still trying to find the right mix of tools in order to do so.

How appropriate that these current tests utilize Star Trek Enterprise episodes for the experiments with this futuristic video technology.

Staci Kramer of MocoNews caught up with Soohoo in the hallways of the ongoing video game conference E3 to ask him about the apparently iPad-friendly videos she had inadvertently stumbled upon.

He told her, "What you see right now is a small, little experiment," and one that, as of this moment, appears to only be partly functional in our own tests. Select Star Trek videos now appear with overlaid buttons that read "play video" - an improvement at least over the blank pages informing you that the videos aren't supported on your device. However, click the "play video" button and nothing happens. No Star Trek, no spaceships, nothing but a play arrow button with a line over it.

This isn't the first time CBS.com has been caught running HTML5 video tests on its public site, a decision that either implies limited resources for internal testing or, perhaps, a desire for media attention.

In March of this year, CBS.com ran another HTML5 experiment, just prior to the iPad's release. At that time, numerous bloggers caught glimpse of video tests both on the CBS.com homepage and elsewhere on the site. The captions alongside these videos read, tantalizingly, "iPad - test," giving no doubt as to the reasons why CBS.com was toying with the new technology.

When pressed for comment, CBS.com would only say that the company was "ready to test any idea that brings that content to the widest possible audience."

HTML5 Support Goes Beyond iPad

The iPad's potential to help sites reach the "widest possible audience" is still up for debate. On the one hand, analysts believe Apple will sell 7 to 8 million units this year. And, so far, sales are strong, especially considering the economy and the device's "luxury" status. As of May 31, Apple announced it has sold more than 2 million iPads worldwide in only 60 days. However, not everyone is convinced of the iPad's game-changing potential. News reporter for the blog TechCrunch, Sarah Lacy, recently called the iPad "a beautiful toy," citing survey data from U.K. consulting firm YouGov, which found that the majority of iPad owners (98%) already own another Apple product, a trend that implies, as she sees it, it's a device that does not "reach across the aisle" to attract a wide, mainstream audience.

While that may end up being true for the iPad itself - it's too soon to say - the tablet form factor is being touted as the next major breakthrough in computing. According to the latest Forrester research report, nearly one in four personal computers sold by 2015 will be a tablet. And it's likely that tablets, en masse, will go the way of the iPad when it comes which technologies they will support or reject, especially, for example, battery-intensive plugins like Adobe's Flash. In other words, betting on HTML5-enabled video isn't just a vote for the iPad, it's potentially a vote for computing's future.

We asked CBS.com about this new round of video tests and, this time, received a more informative response. According to a company representative, the Star Trek episodes were part of ongoing experiments, which is why they may have been functional earlier today but are now broken. It's unknown at this time when or if they will work again.

But is conversion expense the real reason why some media companies are eschewing the Apple iPad craze? Or is the fact that the ad dollars just aren't there yet to make it worth their while?

With support for Flash in both the upcoming Google TV platform, as well as in Google's Android mobile operating system (an OS that's now outselling Apple's iPhone), Google is making it clear that for the time being, the Web still needs Flash. And media companies like NBC and Time Warner are along for the ride. Why convert videos for the iPad when Android may dominate? Why waste time on "iDevice" support when ad dollars associated with streaming media barely impact the bottom line?

These are the very questions major media companies are considering as we speak.

Streaming Ads Don't Pay

Some TV and video is available for free on the iPad today, but it's still more limited that what you would find on the Web in general. ABC has an iPad app, but that's not surprising considering that the Disney-owned property has Jobs as its largest shareholder. CBS has an iPad-friendly site, but only a few shows are available, and media-filled sites like CNN, Fox News, ESPN.com and others offer varying degrees of iPad-readiness.

But NBC won't be following these early adopters, it appears.

There's a very telling quote about this issue from NBC Universal's president and CEO, Jeff Zucker, that he delivered in January. Speaking about tech advances and the iPad in particular, he said, "We believe in ubiquitous distribution of our content and the fact is consumers want to engage with our content wherever they are... As long as we get paid for that content, we don't really care where it's displayed or where it's used."

"Get paid," he said. Streaming video sites, even the NBC Universal creation Hulu.com, have been struggling to make that a reality. Although Hulu finally reached profitability this year, the numbers aren't anywhere near what traditional TV advertising brings in. Hulu's revenue topped $100 million in 2009, according to Hulu chief Jason Kilar. To put that in perspective, a 30-second national broadcast TV commercial maybe makes around $300,00-$500,000 these days.

Too Expensive to Convert?

But is there any truth to the claims that conversion is too expensive? Open-Web zealots will tell you that's a bunch of "FUD" - conversion costs are minimal and there are plenty of solutions out there for ditching Flash and moving to HTML5, the upcoming Web standard that supports plugin-free video viewing.

In reality, while HTML5-enabled video streams are possible today, large media publishers are still waiting for video platform providers to catch up to the capabilities Adobe's Flash currently offers, including rich analytics, advertising and engagement tracking, and more.

That's just around the corner, though.

For example, video platform provider Brightcove will be on par with Flash by year-end, according to its published roadmap. However, the expense of conversion is not necessarily as trivial as Apple CEO Steve Jobs has made it seem. The truth, said Brightcove CEO Jeremy Allaire, is that "it depends." As he told us earlier, publishers that use homegrown video solutions will have more expenses associated with the creation of HTML5 websites. But for customers using platform solutions (like his, of course), the transition is much easier. But Flash and HTML5 will co-exist for years, he said. It's not a matter of ditching one for the other. That means companies offering an iPad-compatible website must maintain it separately and there is some cost involved with that, minimal as it may be.

But Conversion Cost Isn't the Problem Here: NBC & Others Just Want to Make Money

Last month, The New York Times reported that NBC execs were showing off a mock-up of an iPad/iPhone-compatible mobile website that offered full episodes of popular shows, ready for streaming. At the last minute, however, the company decided to block iPad viewing of these shows. At present, only clips and the short-form "webisodes" play on the iPhone or iPad.

The fact that NBC had already gone so far as to build a mock-up of an iPad-friendly site makes the whole "it's too expensive" argument questionable, at least in this case.

So let's get real about this. NBC isn't a great network these days. In fact, it hasn't been "must-see TV" since "Friends" or maybe even the "Seinfeld" era. Olympics coverage notwithstanding, the network trailed others during the past season, losing out to Fox and CBS, both of whom were riding high on the return of the sitcom and reality programming. 

Does NBC want to give away its best content for free right now? No. If anyone is bothering to tune into NBC at all, they had better be paying for it, thinks the network, either via their eyeballs glued to the TV screen, via a paid-for iTunes download or perhaps soon, via a subscription to the long-rumored, but still unrealized Hulu iPad application.

Curse, NBC, Time Warner and other iPad holdouts if you want for limiting the fun you can have with your new slate computer. But for them, the iPad isn't pushing these companies toward the quick adoption of HTML5-powered video - it's pushing them to figure out a business model for making video pay.

A blogger at TheOtherMacBlog, Colum ODwyer, spotted what appeared to be HTML5 video tests late last night when two odd clips appeared on the CBS.com homepage. Screenshots were snagged showing accompanying text that read "iPad - test - dan config." (Oops, Dan, it looks like you pushed the wrong button!)

Another blogger from MacRumors, Arnold Kim, then followed up on this news by delving into the CSS of the CBS.com website itself to discover multiple references to HTML5, the technology that would be needed for viewing videos like these on the iPad. Kim also loaded up the CBS.com website using the iPad SDK Simulator, a tool provided to developers testing iPad applications. Since he was coming from a device which would appear to CBS's servers as an iPad, he was shown a different version of the site. Here, videos displayed with accompanying text that again read "iPad - test - dan config."

Without a doubt this is hard evidence that CBS is at least testing HTML5 technology with the iPad in mind. Whether or not CBS's website will actually be iPad-ready by April 3 is unknown at this time. We have a call into CBS.com and will update this story with their comment when they phone back.Update: CBS will neither confirm or deny their iPad plans. A CBS spokesperson said the company "is constantly putting our content on a variety of platforms," and is "ready to test any idea that brings that content to the widest possible audience."

iPad Owners Want Their Free TV

The iPad is clearly meant to be a more of media consumption device than media creation device. Without a hardware-based keyboard (it's sold separately) or camera, consumers buying the iPad are expected to use it more for reading books and magazines, watching video and playing games than for creating media like videos, photos or even long-form text. For media publishers, the launch of the iPad means more pressure to convert their websites, either whole or in part, to HTML5. Although Flash is used for more than just video, publishers - and most notably sites featuring streaming video news reports or entertainment offerings like online TV shows - will be among the most heavily affected by the iPad's lack of Flash support.

In this case, CBS.com hosts a large library of videos in both standard format and HD. There are short clips as well as full length TV shows, all of which are offered for free to site visitors and are supported by in-stream ads that generate modest revenue for the broadcaster. Although you can find some of the company's content indexed on Hulu, the joint venture between NBC, Fox, ABC and others, clicking through on the links there redirects you over to CBS.com's own website. CBS also has a shaky relationship with Apple's iTunes, keeping popular shows like Big Bang Theory and The Mentalist either out of the store altogether or offering only limited seasons. (Neither appear to be available now.) In other words, if you want to watch CBS video from your computer, CBS.com is the most reliable place to find it. In that case, the company needs to get its website working on the iPad soon, or it will lose out on an audience that will potentially number in the millions by year-end.

When we went to TV.com and selected the March Madness link, it went to the CBS-hosted link mentioned above. It appears, at least in this case, that YouTube has perhaps a slightly tighter integration over CBS' own streaming video site offering. But there are a couple of perks that are also available no matter which path you choose. Going the YouTube route gives you quick access to CBSNCAATourney video clips. Choosing the CBS site offers a live Facebook status update stream similar to what CNN did during the presidential debates. So, either way, everybody wins.

• Martin Atkins
• John Bradley
• Johannes Ernst
• Snorri Giorgetti
• Eran Hammer-Lahav
• Dick Hardt
• Mike Kirkwood
• Brian Kissel
• Scott Kveton
• Chris Messina
• Peter Nixey
• David Recordon
• Eric Sachs
• Nat Sakimura
• Luke Shepard
• Joseph Smarr
• Allen Tom

Current members of the OpenID Foundation are encouraged to visit the OpenID Foundation, log in with their respective OpenIDs, and cast votes for up to seven candidates. For those who have not yet joined the Foundation, registration is open, starting at $25 for an individual account.

The elections will remain open until December 24, 2008. The new Board will be announced before December 31, 2008. Board members begin their term on January 1, 2009.

We'd like to continue the discussion in the comments - and also tell us how you listen to podcasts these days. I usually listen to them while walking the dog. But everyone is different, so tell us your preferred podcast listening method.

Richard MacManus

• NPR: All Songs Considered, plays all the latest music; check out their review of the top music of '08, it's must-listen for music geeks
• Live in Concert from All Songs Considered
• ReadWriteTalk (iTunes link), our own podcast channel, hosted by the awesome Sean Ammirati
• RWW Live, ReadWriteWeb's bi-weekly podcast show hosted by Sean, featuring a few of the RWW authors and special guests
• The Semantic Web Gang, Paul Miller and his Semantic Web crew

Marshall Kirkpatrick (walking the dog while listening to podcasts is a common theme here at RWW)

• StackOverflow (and many other things on ITConversations)
• TWiT: This Week in Tech
• Gilmor Gang
• NY Times Backstory
• RedMonk Podcasts

Sarah Perez

• CNET's Buzz Out Loud ("my hands down favorite")
• Diggnation
• CNET's Loaded
• TWiT: This Week in Tech
• The Social Geeks (featuring Sarah)

Frederic Lardinois

• Slate Gabfest with @jdickerson
• NPR On the Media
• Nature Podcast
• FLOSS Weekly (Free Libre Open Source Software)
• New Yorker Out Loud

Lidija Davis doesn't listen to podcasts, but she participates in one - The Drilldown.

10 Favorite Podcasts From the RWW Community

We got a great response from our friends on Twitter (follow @rww on Twitter if you want to participate in future polls). A number of podcasts were mentioned multiple times. Here are 10 of those that randomly caught our eye:

• This American Life, presented by Chicago Public Radio
• For Immediate Release, a show about PR and tech
• TED Talks, brain food
• You Look Nice Today, "an audio-based Journal of Emotional Hygiene"
• Wait Wait Don't Tell Me, NPR quiz show
• KEXP song of the day, Seattle radio station which has a selection of great podcasts
• Six Pixels of Separation, podcast of Twist Image, a Digital Marketing agency
• MacCast, Mac fans computer show
• BBC Friday night Comedy, "a satirical take on the week's news with the cream of UK comedy talent."
• Strange Love Live, which @dieselboi described as "a fun, insightful and sexy podcast"; our own Marshall Kirkpatrick was on it recently.

Below is the full unstructured list from friends of RWW! Sorry there are no links, but generally you can copy and paste an item into Google to find out more...

Kate LaFrance: Stephen Pierce's blog dtalpha.com.

Roger Harris: Nature magazine, Scientific American, NPR

Terri Ellman: This American Life and Wait! Wait! Don't Tell Me.

Kenny Hyder: the maccast & atomfilms

Mike Billeter: Marvel's own Mighty Marvel Podcast and The B.S. Report with Bill Simmons (ESPN).

Rob Inskeep: Killer Innovations - http://bit.ly/killer and, on a lighter note The Instance - http://bit.ly/Instance

Mike Keliher: You Look Nice Today, On the Media, Shill, Inside PR, For Immediate Release

eco2oh: Cool Hunting Video (brilliant art/culture/design snack) Tiki Bar TV, Eban's Lounge Podcast Selection, Dishy Mix

Joseph Miller: This American Life, TWiT, Stanford Entrepreneurship.

Simon Young: http://forimmediaterelease.biz, http://jaffejuice.com/, http://twistimage.com/blog, and of course http://ijump.tv :)

ipevo: Inside Mac Radio

itamarw: The Bugle (Times Online), BOL

Mike Robinson: BBC Friday night comedy http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio/... TED Talks, always interesting... http://www.ted.com/index.ph...

kitalooclef: More Hip than Hippie, You Look Nice Today, Wait Wait Don't Tell Me, Real Time with Bill Mahr, The World's Tech podcast

Paul Laroquod: ill doctrine; Cult of UHF; Quirks & Quarks; Art & Story; Sessler's Soapbox.

Andrew Korf: Ian Masters on KPFK.org: http://www.ianmasters.org/

Rob Cottingham: For Immediate Release, Lullabot, Six Pixels of Separation, CBCRadio Comedy Factory, Manager Tools

Kevin Marks: RadioLab; In Our Time; This American Life; BBC Friday night Comedy; On The Media more at my last.fm account kevinmarks

Daniel Howe: The Father Bob Show - He's a disgruntled elderly priest from Melbourne who likes to speak his mind http://is.gd/bQ92

Iben Rodriguez: WNYC-RadioLab, VODcars, PBCC-Sunday-Sermons, ScienceFriday, and Berkeley-Groks.

chase squires: Marketplace ( http://marketplace.publicra... ) and the Stuck in the 80s podcast ( http://blogs.tampabay.com/80s/ )

Adam Ritchie: sound opinions from american public media, nyt popcast, npr all songs considered, boston globe page one, rocketboom

Erin | Books in 140: This American Life, CBC's Writers & Company, New York Times Book Review, New Yorker podcasts

Steve O'Hear: TWiT, phonesshow (prev smartphoneshow), mobile with the guru

Charles: "The Lew Rockwell Show" http://lewrockwell.com/podc...

Kim Gaskins: Savage Love http://is.gd/2rG0

Ethan Watrall: iFanboy, Quirks & Quarks, Wormwood, Leviathan Chronicles, OnBoardGames

Kevin Pedraja: This American Life, Fresh Air, NPR Morning News Summary, KEXP Song of the Day, Beautiful Places in HD

Kiran Max Weber: Future Tense, Core Intuition, gdgt, StackOverflow and TWiT. Gillmor Gang would have made it but think it died.

Andrew Korf: http://ecorner.stanford.edu...

Mike Maney: "Open Sources" podcast from @mjasay and @daveofdoom at http://www.opensources.com/

mike dunn: http://www.podiobooks.com, http://www.somethingtobedes, http://www.thebitterestpill, http://www.evilgeniuschronicles, http://www.deltaparkproject.

Hanna Wiszniewska: Changesurfer Radio http://bit.ly/OF7d, Pop!Casts http://bit.ly/liEk, TEDtalks http://bit.ly/vUTq

Tony Bain: venture-voice

alexislyon: Coffee Break Spanish!

McMatt: Sci. Am's "60 Second..." series. Informative, leads to other info and very chipper. http://tinyurl.com/5vgr79

Shaun Trennery: Twit, No Agenda, ZA Tech Show, Tech 5

Sarah Wood: Diggnation, Totally Rad Show, The Stealth Mac, We Need Girlfriends, KEXP song of the day

aussiesasha: social blend @ mixxingbowl.com :)

Sea-Fever Consulting: For Immediate Release, Six Pixels of Separation, No Agenda, You Look Nice Today, Just One More Book

Will King: TEDTalks, FastCompany.TV, MacCast, NPR Planet Money, KRCW LeShow

Sherif Mansour: 1) The Scoop (Aussie) http://tinyurl.com/594dwx 2) Instantiate Podcast (Aussie) http://instantiate.platform... , 3)TWiT (US)

arikhanson: For Immediate Release; Marketing Over Coffee

Chris from Germany: http://www.podcast.de/podcast/8995/Sci_xpert_-_Leschs_Universum
it's in German, a Munich university professor, over 30 parts, 15mins each

Steve Spalding: You Look Nice Today - Merlin Mann's podcast, Buzz Outloud, TWiT

Aaron Hockley: TWIP, TackSharp, Hanselminutes, .NET Rocks

Bram Pitoyo: strangelovelive

Chris O'Rourke: StrangeloveLive, Webb Alert, The Microsoft IT Manager Podcast

Chris Judson: FOSS Weekly, Reduced Shakespeare Co, YouLookNiceToday, Speaking of Faith, Wait, wait...don't tell me (last two are NPR types)

Michele: The Moth, Splendid Table, This American Life

dieselboi: Strangelovelive is a fun, insightful and sexy podcast

Brett Roberts: TED, Ask a Ninja

dekkerd: GDGT weekly, TwiT, loaded, Buzz out loud, geekbrief.tv

Shelley O'Connor: www.polyweekly.com

Jon Burg: FIR, Six Pixels of Separation, Cranky Geeks, NBC News, Naaleh

Finally, if you're wondering who is the guy who got a podcasting RSS tattoo, it is Drew Olanoff!

We think it's CBS Radio and not Clear Channel which has made the biggest strides. CBS' partnerships with AOL and Yahoo!, along with its ownership of trendy online radio app last.fm, have effectively made CBS Radio the most powerful force in Internet radio in 2008.

Kevin Conroy, executive vice president of AOL, recently wrote in a guest blog post at Radio Business Report about the evolution of AOL Radio. Conroy wrote that the partnership with CBS Radio allowed AOL to tap into the "core competency in traditional radio" that CBS had. At the same time CBS got access to "AOL's substantial online listener base, and allowed it to connect with the AOL Network, which reaches more than 110 million unique visitors a month", wrote Conroy. He also noted that AOL got "an improved player, built by CBS Radio" that works on both PCs and Macs.

At the end of August we published data from comScore about the Internet Radio industry. It showed that the big Internet companies still dominate, specifically AOL Radio and Yahoo Music. At that point AOL Radio had been showing excellent annual growth, with a 56% increase over the past year. However Yahoo Music had decreased 19% annually since July 07. According to Reuters, in October comScore data had AOL at 3.99 million unique visitors, while CBS Web properties had 3.95 million unique visitors and Yahoo! Launchcast had 2.87 million. When you look at who powers both AOL and Yahoo now, it's clear that CBS has significantly increased its market presence since mid-08.

At ReadWriteWeb we've tended to focus on the innovative Web native apps that have risen independently of the big radio stations. According to comScore Pandora rose 89% from July 07 - July 08, while last.fm had 62% annual growth. But both the traditional radio broadcasting and Internet bigcos have been steadily increasing their influence - none moreso than CBS, which in addition to the AOL/Yahoo! partnerships this year also acquired last.fm in May 2007.

And then there's mobile. As Reuters pointed out, the iPhone has had a big influence on radio for mobile devices this year (see our post Top 5 Streaming Music Apps for the iPhone for examples). Other mobile devices, such as Blackberry and the Internet phones from Nokia, are also ramping up.

What other trends have you noticed in 2008 from Internet radio? What do you expect to see happen in 2009?

That's 10% more than Google paid for YouTube, and that deal was all for stocks. CBS paid a 45% premium over CNet's closing stock price and it paid it mostly in cash. CBS buying CNet is a big, complicated deal with a lot of possible take aways, but below are ours.

Founded in 1993, CNet is the granddaddy of all the blog networks on the web. It's had a good long time to marinate, has major internal problems like suit-happy shareholders and arguably fluctuating traffic, but CNet is as stable an online collection of brands as anyone out there.

What gets validated here is this: great online ad sales, high production value, serious talent, company maturity and breadth in both content and distribution. While all of those have always been important business traits, upstart content networks on the web have tended to focus far more on marquee personalities. Perhaps that's only a short term strategy until some of us can hope to build out networks with more fundamental business strengths.

CNet's content producers may not be flashy web 2.0 names but they've got rock stars of their own over there. Larry Dignan is an enterprise dark horse that our readers may or may not know about but who regularly rocks Techmeme more than anyone but TechCrunch. Declan McCullagh may be the best political tech blogger there is. Caroline McCarthy combines scoops, research and professionalism in a way that anyone would do well to learn from. WebWare may not get talked about in some Web 2.0 circles, but it's one of the very biggest blogs in that market and is written by people like Rafe Needleman and Josh Lowensohn - both of whom would be great on TV. I'd embed a CNet video here to demonstrate its production value, but few of the company's video properties allow embedding. So much for web 2.0, eh?

The above are just the Web 2.0 type names at CNet, we're less familiar with the company's powerhouse properties in gaming, consumer electronics and autos.

The importance of a strong ad sales team can't be understated. While most blog networks in this nascent medium end up selling ads with one side of the brain and writing content with the other, maybe teaming up with an ad network that pays the bills but doesn't power growth, CNet is lauded for their in-house ad sales team. If hiring top talent, doing in-depth research and offering high production value are important, then there are few aspects of content online more key than strong ad sales. Strong ad salespeople are hard to come by.

Finally, CNet's distribution of content (including some RWW articles) in China and Japan is more serious than any upstart blog network has been able to accomplish. What markets could be more important, other than India?

CNet is a mature, accomplished and broad network. While it may be more fun for some of us to read other, smaller, edgier blogs (RWW included, we hope), CNet properties are far closer to being household names than any one else in our market. Now they're part of CBS.

What Will CNet Look Like at CBS?

It appears that CNet will maintain a high degree of independence at CBS, but we can assume that some of its energy and brains will focus on bringing CBS into the next era online. Along with recent, much smaller, purchases of the recommendation technology behind Last.fm and the brains of Wall Strip, CNet should help CBS put more than just its toe into the waters of the web.

Will CBS TV content become available online more quickly? Will CBS TV content get better with an infusion of creative talent from the web? Will CBS create a show called "Everybody Loves Redmond," as one joker in our community of readers offered? Will all talent get diffused and leave innovation lovers wondering what happened to CNet in just a few short years?

It's hard to say for sure, but if nothing else - CNet offers one vision of what it takes for an online content network to cash out big time.

Last month we reported that web-to-TV drama "Quarterlife" had a less than stellar network TV debut. After the first episode drew disappointing Nielsen numbers, NBC canceled the show and moved the remaining episodes to cable channel Bravo.

So why doesn't a lage online following mean success offline? I can think of two reason. First, many media consumers on the Internet are just that, media consumers on the Internet. Yeah, they want more episodes of their favorite shows, but they want to keep consuming that content their way: via the web on sites like YouTube or BitTorrent. Which until online video monetization is figured out, may not really be feasible (a single episode of a scripted drama like "Jericho" can cost in the millions of dollars to produce).

Second, and perhaps more significantly, social networking tools have provided a means for people to organize more quickly and effectively around a shared passion than we've seen in the past. We noted last month that Facebook has been used to organize large political rallies and successful online fund drives, and we saw the same phenomenon in this year's US presidential elections. Specifically, Ron Paul supporters were able to use the web to effectively organize around their candidate and dominate coverage on online social media sites like Digg and YouTube, as well as raise a ton of money. But just like with the TV shows, that online movement didn't translate to offline support.

Simply, online tools have provided a way for a small group of impassioned people to make a lot of noise.

What do you think? Are there any other reasons why strong online numbers haven't translated well to the TV? Do you think Internet fandom will ever be ready for primetime? Share your thoughts in the comments.

But there are plenty of potential hangups. Take the deal that CBS announced this morning with mobile social network Loopt. CBS plans to use Loopt's GPS technology to deliver location based ads to CBS mobile users. These aren't exactly like the scenario I announced above, since CBS will be displaying location-aware ads on top of mobile content rather than deliver them via text message. That actually highlights the first problem with location based advertising.

It would take a perfect confluence of events in order for many ads to make sense. Not only do you have to be near the thing that is being advertised, but you also need to be viewing the CBS mobile site. For entities like Starbucks that exist on every street corner, that might not be an issue, but in practice how often do you think you'll be in the proximity of one of CBS' advertisers while you're viewing the site? It'll happen, sure, but it drastically cuts down on the number of opportunities to deliver location aware mobile ads when you have to be viewing a specific mobile web page at just the right time to receive an ad.

CBS can, of course, deliver more general ads fixed to your location -- but is that really taking advantage of the GPS capabilities that Loopt offers? Yeah, it's neat to see ads for things in the city I am traveling in, but not as neat as seeing ads for the businesses on the street I'm walking down.

The fix for that, of course, is to deliver the ads by text message, triggered by proximity to the advertiser's storefront. We questioned in December whether mobile ad startup Fluc would be able to fill inventory for a similar type of ad scheme (though is isn't clear if Fluc is actually targeting ads by GPS or if they're just asking users where they are located). "If the GAP knows you're near a mall where they have an anchor store, and they know from your Fluc account that you fit their consumer profile, then they might pay to send you an ad," we wrote. "That's a lot of 'ifs,' though."

Further, ads like this have to be opt-in. Not only is there a privacy issue involved, but text message ads are also the least likely to be trusted by consumers, according to a Nielsen Internet survey. The CBS-Loopt ads are opt-in.

Another hangup with the idea of location-based ads is reach. Right now the CBS ads are only available to customers using a GPS-enabled phone on a network that Loopt has a partnership with -- so far that means just people on Sprint Nextel or Boost Mobile. Loopt's CEO predicts that by the end of 2008 there could be 50 million mobile phones in the United States equipped to receive this type of advertising, but for now the audience remains relatively small.

Even so, location based advertising is a tantalizing vision for the industry. Google CEO Eric Schmidt said last week that location based ads are the future and will lead a revolution in mobile advertising. Last year Google launched a mobile version of AdSense and their own mobile OS. I think we can expect location aware ads from them in the near future. And whatever Google does in the world of advertising, you can bet others will follow suit.

The ad scenario I described above is possible (and it can get even spookier and more finely targeted when mashed up with other data -- say, your social networking profiles), but it's probably not quite here yet. At least, I haven't seen it. The question is -- do we even want that? Should we potentially trade more of our privacy for more relevant advertising? What does a dollar off a latte mean to you?

In the following post syndicated from last100, our network blog about digital lifestyles, Daniel Langendorf analyzes how last.fm is much more than a streaming service - it is aiming to create "communities around content".

Interesting. What does this mean?

But first, here’s the deal: CBS and Last.fm, the London-based online music streaming site CBS bought for $280 million last May, have built a site where music fans can stream any song they want for free. Well, almost for free. The site is supported by advertising.

What makes the CBS/Last.fm site so compelling — it’s being dubbed as the “world’s largest jukebox” — is that all four major record labels and 150,000 independents are participating, contributing songs and entire albums. This adds up to 3.5 million tracks from Universal Music Group, Sony BMG, Warner, and EMI, all of whom will be paid (through separate agreements) from ad revenue.

The site is also open to unsigned bands, who will share the ad revenue associated with their songs.

The process is almost too good to be true: Music fans simply go to Last.fm, which has an active community of 15 million active users in more than 200 countries. It’s best known for the song recommendation engine that tracks the music-listening habits and links them to other fans with similar tastes. Search for an artist, listen to a song, and see a small “billboard” ad on the screen while the tune plays. People don’t even need to register with the site, if they don’t want to.

Fans can listen to any song three times before they are directed to one of Last.fm’s partners, including iTunes, Amazon, and 7Digital, where they can purchase the track. And just so we’re clear here, tracks on Last.fm are not downloadable, so people cannot put streamed music on a digital music player.

The CBS/Last.fm approach is not completely new. RealNetworks launched a service nearly three years ago that lets users stream 25 songs per month for free. Napster, launched in 2006, lets fans stream five songs for free before they are asked to ante up the credit card. Spiral Frog, the Peter Gabriel-supported We7, imeem, and others, offer similar services.

Streaming business models, however, have had limited success.

So back to community. What’s the big deal with the CBS/Last.fm almost-free, ad-supported streaming service besides the big media-name backing and the involvement of the major record labels and a slew of indies?

As Moonves said, “Community is clearly the future.”

In existing CBS “content communities” are TV shows from CBS, The CW, and Showtime, movies from Paramount, other TV stations, CBS Radio, CBS Interactive, even the Simon & Schuster book-publishing business. And let’s not forget: CBS is the network broadcasting next month’s Grammy Awards, the music industry’s equivalent to the Oscar’s.

So we can imagine every song, every artist played or featured on a CBS property most likely will be referenced, cross-referenced, and made available through Last.fm, giving CBS another way to reach like-minded consumers who want to share their interests with others.

The more people go to Last.fm to hear what song was just played on “CSI:NY”, the more money CBS and Last.fm make off advertising and residual sales. Imagine at the end of the show a text crawl noting that the music tonight can be heard at Last.fm. On the Last.fm side of the equation, there can be season-long playlists from CBS properties, conveniently cross-referenced, tagged, and shared.

“This is promising, not only for the consumers but for the majors themselves,” IDC consumer audio analyst Susan Kevorkian told Wired. “Digital technology holds a great deal of promise . . . artist and labels can sustain relationships with consumers well past the point that they have historically sustained them.”

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to the last100 RSS feed!

"We're excited about these partnerships -- they allow our users to find and listen to a much broader range of music," said Songza founder Aza Raskin. "Being able to listen to entire songs -- not just 30-second clips -- is a great thing for music fans. It will lead to more informed purchases of music, and more purchases overall."

Songza also announced a promotional program in collaboration with Creative Commons where independent artists can have their tracks featured on the site's recommended page for 24 hours for 99 cents. According to Songza, the recommended page receives 40,000 unique visitors each day.

Last.fm announced on their blog that beginning today users would be able to stream full-length tracks. People from EMI, Sony BMG, Universal and Warner are all on board, as well as "thousands of independent artists and labels." The service is available immediately in the US, UK, and Germany.

The CBS-owned site already has deals in place with various royalty collection agencies, but under their new program, unsigned artists can upload music and be paid directly for every stream.

In a bit of Facebook-esque hyperbole, Last.fm co-founder Richard Jones proclaimed on the company's blog that Last.fm was "redesigning the music economy."

Last.fm claims that their service is "the biggest legal collection of music available to play online for free." However, with Songza's 28 million songs, it may not be the biggest collection of music available for streaming (the legality of Songza's music might not always be clear since the site is a music search engine, rather than a host like Last.fm). So how do they stack up?

I first tried a search for a relatively obscure artist -- Lemon Jelly -- in Songza. 45 results. In Last.fm: "Lemon Jelly isn’t yet available to play on Last.fm." Next a more popular artist -- Radiohead. Songza yielded about 35 results with a lot of duplicates. Last.fm had 4 tracks, but only one was full-length. How about contemporary rap artist T.I.? 45 results on Songza, a handful of 30 second clips on Last.fm.

I'll leave you to do your own tests and draw your own conclusions.

Update: According to paidContent Last.fm's service will only allow tracks to be streamed 3 times under the current structure of the deal with the record labels. Also, see the comments for info on why my math above a little wonky.