I think networks are a thing of the past. I don’t know anybody under 30 who is watching television the way I watched television. Technology has allowed people to change the way they consume the news, and we want to be where people are going.

Former Fox commentator Glenn Beck, whose first show airs Monday on his Internet-only GBTV channel

This morning, News Corp. CEO and majordomo Rupert Murdoch, his son James (who is also a top company exec) — as well as former employee and full-time lightning rod Rebekah Brooks — march on down to the British Parliament to answer questions from a committee there about the ever-growing PhoneGate scandal.

For those living under a rock, News Corp. is embroiled in ever more serious controversy about who knew what and when (also where, why and how much) in the hacking of phones of a myriad of well-known people in the U.K. by its News of the World tabloid newspaper.

Besides celebrities and politicians, that has included the voicemails of a murdered girl, an appalling act that has galvanized public opinion and the weak spines of legislators into action in this inquiry.

It’s sordid, it’s ugly and it makes for what could be an explosive event, starring the man who brought you “Titanic,” Glenn Beck, “Glee” and, most recently, the sale of Myspace.

There’s no question, getting the 80-year-old Murdoch on the ropes will be the aim of the committee members holding the hearing, and how one of the world’s most famous and legendary media moguls performs — or does not — will be a big deal to both interested observers and News Corp. shareholders.

By way of full disclosure, that’s not me, but this site is owned by Dow Jones, which is owned by News Corp. In other words, somewhere up the corporate food chain, Murdoch is my boss.

In any case, that has never stopped me or AllThingsD.com from telling it like it is, so here is the liveblog of what is sure to be a doozy of a media event:

6:36 am PT:: It all starts for the Murdochs, as soon as the former Scotland Yard head John Yates has completed questioning about the police’s obvious bungling of the various investigations over the years.

Rupert Murdoch and his son, James Murdoch, are on, looking grave and dressed in grey.

Sitting behind them are Rupert Murdoch’s wife, Wendi Deng, and his top adviser at News Corp., Joel Klein, who is heading up the phone hacking scandal internally at the company.

The hearing — in a room that looks like a high school debate could take place there — starts off politely enough.

But the first question is directed toward James Murdoch about his clearly incomplete investigation when phone hacking allegations were first made many years ago. He begins with an apology.

“These actions do not live up to the standards of News Corp.,” says the younger Murdoch.

He is interrupted by his father, Rupert Murdoch, who notes rather dramatically: “This is the most humble day of my life.”

The questioner quickly asks the obvious query, after James Murdoch claims News Corp. was not in full possession of the facts when execs had told a previous committee there was no reason to believe there was more widespread hacking.

Were News Corp. execs lying?

James Murdoch continues to insist that the bulk of evidence came out — “real evidence” — in later civil trials. And also, that News Corp. is now investigating the situation fully.

He throws around words like “proactive action” and “transparency,” which is probably cold comfort now to those hacked when things were less clear to News Corp.’s senior management.

Now up, Rupert Murdoch, who is asked quickly about statements he made about not tolerating wrongdoing and who had lied to him at News Corp. about the phone hacking.

Apparently, he “didn’t know” a lot about the hacking that took place, while also defending the non-hacking employees of his company.

But the questioner is still on him about exactly what he did know about the situation, which seems to be — at least according to his testimony — a lot of I-don’t-knows.

6:53 am: It continues about what Rupert Murdoch knew and when he knew it and what he did. Or not.

As Rupert Murdoch keeps up with this tone of not being clued in to what have turned out to be critical events, James Murdoch wants to keep jumping in with the details, which he is eager to impart.

“At what point did you find out criminality was endemic at News of the World?” asks the questioner.

Rupert Murdoch does not like the word endemic, but stresses that he was “shocked, appalled and ashamed” by the case of the murdered girl, Milly Dowler.

The questioner seems frustrated by Rupert Murdoch’s answers, which are, for the typically razor-sharp media mogul, unusually slow.

Like a persistent terrier who wants to perform, James Murdoch is back again offering to serve up the deets.

7:04 am: Now, it is onto the closing down of News of the World: Was the tabloid shut down because of the criminality?

“We had broken our trust with our readers,” says Rupert Murdoch. “We felt ashamed for what had happened.”

A new questioner is on, with a bizarre query about why Rupert Murdoch came in the back door of the Prime Minister’s house at 10 Downing Street on a recent visit there.

It’s a cloddish effort to show him as a powerful puppetmaster to pols, but only serves as a punch line.

Back on track, with questions about whether there was hacking in the U.S., which Rupert Murdoch said he could not believe had happened.

More questions about how badly the company acted, which came down to the questions about whether he was “ultimately” responsible for the hacking.

“Nope,” says Rupert Murdoch, who keeps insisting he relied on others, some of whom apparently “misled” him.

It’s an astonishing admission and, really, excuse, given he has been chairman, CEO and a very strong leader of News Corp. for more than a half-century.

7:16 am: A new questioner, who asks who decided to close down News of the World. It was Murdoch himself, his son and other execs.

Next up, why did News Corp. pay off a victim of hacking, which James Murdoch did without informing his father or the News Corp. board.

James Murdoch essentially points out that it is typical to do this in companies of the global scale of News Corp.

These are apparently very busy, busy, busy people, who do not seem to have time to notice how such juicy and best-selling scoops might have been magically produced by News of the World.

Onto ethical conduct guidelines, which News Corp. has in a pamphlet form, says James Murdoch, but pages which some at the company have obviously never cracked.

Rupert Murdoch is asked again about his culpability in the case, which he continues to maintain he does not shoulder the blame.

James Murdoch does note that the company “will think more forcefully … about our journalism and ethics.”

Given the situation, in which every day brings a new revelation of bad acts by News Corp. employees, this promise of better behavior seems to be a case of much too little and very, very late.

Rupert Murdoch still uses the opportunity to stress the need for a free press, despite its excesses.

7:31 am: More about the payments to settle with phone hacking victims and how soon the company realized the problems were more widespread.

James Murdoch talks about how he might have acted differently had he known more then as he does now.

“If we knew now what we knew then,” says James Murdoch, “we would have taken more action and moved more aggressively.”

But what else is he going to say? It’s a could-have, would-have, should-have line of questioning that is eliciting very little in the way of true information.

Finally, a good point about “willful blindness,” which is a term from the Enron scandal about avoiding knowing about problems you really should have known about.

“Is that a question?,” asks James Murdoch. It is a statement, actually, and a decent enough one.

“We didn’t do that,” says Rupert Murdoch firmly this time.

Still, soon enough, Rupert Murdoch is insisting he was not as involved as people have imagined him to be with the management of his newspapers.

A new questioner is pressing this important point, but Rupert Murdoch is not biting on a query about his legendarily hands-on managing style.

“I’d say, ‘What’s doing?’” he explains about his conversations with editors, but adding he might not have been told about payoffs to phone hacking victims.

The questions are in the deep weeds here, but it’s still interesting that Rupert Murdoch continues to maintain that his life was too busy to wallow in the details, however controversial and important those details might be.

7:55 am: More and more don’t-knows pile up and up in a giant mountain of acts perpetrated by someone somewhere, but not the Murdochs.

“I can tell you I was surprised as you were,” says James Murdoch about certain payments to various hackers and those who were hacked.

Was it Les Hinton, who then ran News International and later Dow Jones, from which he recently resigned?

Could be! Maybe! Mistake were made! Who knows!

Well, someone does!

It moves onto Brooks, the tarnished News International exec and editor whom Rupert Murdoch does note he still trusts. Finally, some certainty!

Brooks is definitely one of the more compelling characters in this drama, although the media focus on her striking red hair color seems odd and vaguely sexist, as if she is some flame-haired she-devil from media hell. She might certainly be guilty in this mess, but her fabulous hair has nothing to do with it.

(Rupert’s mane is grey, by the way, and James’ is brown, if you really need to know.)

Fascinatingly, Murdoch’s backing of Brooks has been strong and consistent, despite intense criticism of her by many in this scandal.

The payment of legal fees of perpetrators and payments to the victims in the hacking seems to obsess one questioner, who wants News Corp. to stop doing it.

Murdoch says he’d like to if contracts did not preclude that, which essentially means News Corp. will keep up forking over the legal fees and payments.

8:12 am: The attention turns to how James Murdoch found out about the various emails that showed there was more evidence of hacking than was first thought about and what he felt about it.

He says very little, noting that the matter is under police investigation. It’s not don’t-know now, but can’t-say.

The hearing is beginning to feel a little rope-a-dope, with the Murdochs apologizing and taking blows, saying very little — either claiming lack of knowledge or lack of ability to comment about the ongoing police inquiry — and tiring out the questioners.

It is a classic tactic of the boxing champion Muhammad Ali and it works in the ring.

Whether that will be the case with PhoneGate remains to be seen, but it certainly has made what could have been a more explosive hearing much less so.

Instead, it seems to have turned into a what didn’t the Murdochs know and when didn’t they know it hearing.

On questioner gets this irony. “That’s frankly unsatisfactory,” he says about the Murdochs continuing shock and surprise at the thorny situation they find themselves in.

Maybe it seems a little hard to believe, but the persistent story from James Murdoch is that they were told by their lawyers, the police and others that nothing was awry once the initial phone hacking investigation was complete and only found out about the larger problem in later civil lawsuits.

But, asks the questioner to Rupert Murdoch, should his editors and managers at News of the World have known about it?

Of course, they should have.

But, once again, the legendary media baron, who made his fortune and fame in disseminating news and information across the world in newspapers, on television, on satellite and on the Web — at least for now — can’t say.

So, was he “kept in the dark” about the situation? Rupert Murdoch acknowledges he might have asked more questions, although he noted his British newspapers were only a small part of his massive empire.

But, he adds, “Anything that is seen as a crisis comes to me.”

Well, not the phone hacking crisis, it seems.

But, they’re sorry. So sorry. And, of course, humbled.

8:54 am: Suddenly, there is a disturbance, in which someone seems to have possibly attempted to accost the Murdochs.

But it is not clear what has happened, as the hearings are suspended for 10 minutes.

James Murdoch leaps up quickly to protect his father, which he has been doing in this hearing verbally already, where the strategy seems to be to let him largely do all the talking.

Even faster on her feet and with arms raised toward a man in a plaid shirt and carrying a pie plate with shaving cream is Rupert Murdoch’s wife, Wendi.

The man seems to have managed to get some of the foam on Rupert Murdoch, but Wendi Deng appears to have partially thwarted her husband from receiving a full pie in the face.

It’s the first striking visual of this hearing, protecting the patriarch and the king of the empire from harm, no matter what.

Here is a video of the incident:

According to Britain’s Channel 4: “As the man was being led away in handcuffs escorted by a single police officer, he refused to give his name, saying: ‘As Mr Murdoch himself said, I’m afraid I cannot comment on an ongoing police investigation.’”

9:09 am: The room is cleared, so it is only the Murdoch crew behind James and Rupert Murdoch, and now the committee is even more solicitous.

Rupert Murdoch is without his jacket and his wife is being commended for her most excellent left hook.

Still, it’s back to business and the questioner does zero in on a major disconnect over how two media execs as famously aggressive and involved as the Murdochs were so passive in this hacking situation.

It “was a terrible shock,” says James Murdoch.

The same is said about what would be even more disturbing and recent allegations of the hacking of the victims of the 9/11 bombings.

Both father and son say there is no evidence of this so far, but they were surely looking into it.

While it certainly did not come through in what have largely been feckless questions from the committee, the final questioner does correctly ask the pair if they might want to pay more attention.

The last question is for Rupert Murdoch and finally gets to the real query everyone wants to ask.

Noting Murdoch is “captain of the ship,” she asks if he has considered resigning.

“No,” answers Murdoch firmly.

“Why not?” she presses.

“People let me down and it’s for them to pay,” says Rupert Murdoch. “But I think, frankly, I am the best person do clean this up.”

He finishes up with a statement about being sorry, how he was also betrayed and how phone hacking and bribery is wrong.

“Saying sorry is not enough, things must be put right,” he says.

Finally, something we do know.

The site, essentially yet another clone of deal sites like Groupon and LivingSocial, is the first major signal as to Beck’s post-talk show plans. (We’re guessing running for President of the United States has been scratched off the list, since his ratings have recently fizzled.)

Beck is set to leave his Fox News cable show “Glenn Beck” later this year.

While Markdown.com is a totally new venture for Beck, and the first celebrity-branded deal site we’ve seen, Beck is no stranger to hawking products. He also appears in advertising for Goldline, a service that sells gold coins to consumers.

Although the site is set to launch with deals on chocolate and online identity security, what about some more “Beck-centric” offers–such as on chalkboards and maybe his latest book?

Or, the whole thing could be a way to get rid of all those unsold t-shirts from his Washington, D.C., rally this past year, or perhaps to give Jon Stewart more fodder for his cable talk show.

(Full disclosure: Fox News is owned by News Corp, which also owns Dow Jones, which owns this site.)

While the Silicon Valley digital giants are fighting on much bigger playing fields, BoomTown is enjoying the mini-battle brewing between Facebook Live and Google Beat.

What, pray tell, are those?

Well, Facebook Live launched about a month ago, and includes all kinds of insidery videos from the social networking giant.

Facebook Live notes on its Facebook page that it is an “official live video streaming channel, providing a deeper look into our features, partners & employees.”

That includes interviews by Facebook’s marketing exec Randi Zuckerberg, live event streaming and also a look-see at demos.

Google (GOOG) has been putting up a lot of videos on its official YouTube channel for a while now, such as executive talks, tips, product explainers, life-at-Google vignettes and even a Rubik’s Cubes Googley art wall competition.

Now, it seems to have upped the stakes with last week’s launch of Google Beat, which is–as a blog post described it–a video series that “highlights some of the hottest searches on Google in the U.S.”

This past week, searches centered on Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally and hurricane information, which seems like a good fit.

Personally, I like both entries from Facebook and Google and want even more.

What about a look inside Facebook Mark Zuckerberg’s sock drawer? Or perhaps a gander at exactly what Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin searched for over Labor Day?

I say, the more, the merrier–or, in this case, the geekier, the nerdier!

Although here is something to ponder: While Twitter is likely minutes away from broadcasting “Twit Wit,” would Apple (AAPL) ever do something like this?

(Answer: Never ever ever.)

Here are two recent Facebook Live posts–one an interview of the Places team and the other a tech talk on Facebook infrastructure.

They are followed by the first two Google Beat episodes, starring Anne Espiritu, as well as the ever-changing colors of Google’s signature exercise ball.

Enjoy:

Remember Rupert Murdoch’s plan to convince other media companies to join him behind a pay wall and offer their stuff only via subscription? It’s still around, in some form. We’ll hear more about it in “three to four weeks” Murdoch said today during News Corp.’s earnings call.

Just what Murdoch has in store isn’t entirely clear. Last year, he sent digital media head Jon Miller out to convince rival newspaper publishers to join News Corp.’s Wall Street Journal in the pay-to-play ring. But it appears that Murdoch may now be thinking of a subscription offering that extends beyond newspapers and into entertainment.

I’ve asked News Corp. if it has anything to add to Murdoch’s hazy comments this afternoon, but I’m not optimistic. I do think we’ll hear more about this before the press conference Murdoch plans for later this month, though.

Meanwhile, here’s some background on “Project Alesia,” the subscription/pay wall plan that may or may not be what Murdoch was talking about today.

Earlier

We’ve seen the numbers, so we know that News Corp. had a very nice quarter. Now let’s hear what Rupert Murdoch has to say about his company’s performance. I’m also interested to see how much ire Murdoch expresses for Google (GOOG) and how much ardor he has for Apple’s (AAPL) iPad, among other digital topics.

The following is a live paraphrase that includes my editorial notes; I’ll note direct quotes where appropriate.

Liveblog

Dave DeVoe going over numbers from the release.

Earnings include one-time items of three cents per share. [Should net that out of earlier reports when comparing to Wall Street expectations.]

Newspapers: Operating income up nearly five times. Higher advertising across nearly all markets. Forex helps, too.

“Other” (includes Myspace): Lower search and ad revenue, but costs are down.

Some balance-sheet talk: We’ve got a lot of cash on the books, and we know it. Some of it will get paid out to Jim Cameron and other participants in “Avatar.” But we’re working on ways to deploy the extra cash. We’ll get back to you on it by the next quarter.

Guidance: We’ve done better than anticipated in lots of our business for the last nine months, but our next quarter will be down. That’s because we expect the film business to be down $100 million, even including “Avatar” DVD releases (reason: We had very good quarter last year). Also, Fox Broadcast will be down. So we’re only bumping up guidance a bit.

Rupert Murdoch:

Exceptional results, “pretty much across the board.”

We’re psyched for five reasons:

1. Content. Really important, and we’re really good at it. Shout-outs for “Avatar,” Fox News Channel, newspapers, TV shows. “Fortune favors the bold,” etc. “We have the no. 1 national newspaper on all three continents.”

2. Technology: We’re good at that, too. The Apple iPad, “which I believe will lead a revolution in content consumption.” First month, 64,000 active users for The Wall Street Journal iPad app. “Unlike the Kindle, we keep 100 percent of the subscriber revenue from the iPad.” Innovative subscription model coming to deliver content to people whenever they want it (paging Jon Miller, James Murdoch).

[Apologies, lost the thread here. But Rupert is gung-ho about TV and other core businesses]

Q&A

Is there concern that you can’t keep growth in the next fiscal year? Can you?

Murdoch: Absolutely! Hedges on numbers. “We have a great slate of films coming up, but we don’t have an ‘Avatar’ in there.” If ad growth keeps up, “I think we can be very confident.”

COO Chase Carey: I agree! The ad market is actually picking up. Sports has been a little slower than other ad markets, and they’re now picking up. “Looks great.”

Question for Devoe: Please talk more about that big cash pile.

Murdoch: I can answer that! “We’re well aware that our balance sheet…is inefficient at the moment.” Increased dividends, stock buy backs, investing in our businesses, possibility of “opportunistic investments,” which we’ve been “nervous” about doing in past year but now we have some things we’re looking at. Cue M&A klaxons!

More color on the TV biz, please.

Carey: Strong recovery in most categories. Not just auto and telecom. Financial, insurance, all sorts of stuff. “It’s pretty broad.”

Murdoch: “We’re seeing pretty optimistic and expanded advertising budgets from the big advertisers.” Not sure when that money is coming, but would guess Q2, when they’re launching new cars. “There’s a lot of money out there on the boards.” And as free over-the-air audiences shrink–and ours is shrinking less–that money is finding its way to cable. So any show that can show any sort of advertising can attract money. “It feels good; that’s all I’m saying.”

Please talk about new retrans/carriage negotiations.

Carey: Fox News deals starting to come up. Will be staggered over a couple of years. “I think the Fox News network…is certainly–maybe with ESPN–second to none.” So pay up, cable guys! (And customers!)

Carey mounts a long defense of Sky Italia. I’ll refrain from transcribing.

Similarly, you’re probably not interested to read what he has to say about satellite TV in Europe.

Netflix is killing it. What does that mean for you guys? Good news because it says good thing about your library? Or maybe an opportunity for you to do more with your library?

Carey: Noncommittal answer. But: “There is a question whether the Netflix model is getting us fair value for our product.” So we’ll keep looking at windowing content and whether we’re getting paid enough for our stuff. “I think it’s a focus.”

Please talk about Fox Audience Network plans and MySpace/Google plans.

Carey: Google plan doesn’t affect FAN. Not going to comment on “rumors.” “I don’t think that’s productive.” But! The key is to build enough traffic to attract enough dollars. FAN has a done a good job.

Let me try to re-ask the same question regarding restructuring or spinoff of FAN.

Murdoch: Praises MySpace. In the past few years “we made some big mistakes,” but we have fine new management now. “Early indications, and they’re only indications, are that we’re getting new visitors, and they’re staying longer,” so ad dollars will follow.

[Sorry missed this question, but I believe it is about guidance.] Murdoch is not talking up the film slate, but indicates that he’s spending a bunch of money on movies, and the company will take hits on those initially before they see dollars come back.

Carey: The film business fluctuates from quarter to quarter. But our team is great, and we have great movies coming. “We couldn’t be more excited and positive about the film business.”

Murdoch: Our movie investors praise us.

Any film properties you’re interested in?

Murdoch: “We’d look if something real came onto the market,” but we don’t put MGM in that category, at least not at the price it’s asking. We prefer to invest in our own stuff, and that goes for TV shows as well. “Glee” is a big hit and we own it. Same goes for “Modern Family.”

More info on digital, please. What about MySpace profitability? What happens when Google deal ends w/MySpace?

Carey: “Clearly, MySpace is a work in progress.” [This is a familiar refrain.] But promising signs. Talking up “Glee” tryouts. Improved the platform, etc. By the end of 2010, we want a foundation installed that we can go forward with, and we want to have a cash positive business going into 2011. “The trends are better but they’re not what they need to be….A number of the key metrics are not going up, but they’re better than what they were.”

Are you getting retrans fees for Fox broadcast now?

Not yet.

Why isn’t TV station top-line growth showing up on overall segment results?

Has to do with way we present results. [Confusing and confused discussion about bookkeeping ensues.]

[Still going!]

Press Q&A! (Usually much more entertaining)

Question about Australian news story about…mining?

Murdoch: “Nothing to do with media.”

Same guy has a question about Australian football (?). Rupert professes shock about whatever the scandal was.

Eighty-one advertisers bailed on Glenn Beck. Now it seems as if the only ads are in-house and for gold. When will you stop subsidizing the show and require it to carry its own weight?

Rupert says the 81 number is wrong and that Glenn Beck show doing great.

More color on that subscription model, please.

Rupert: Press conference coming in three-to-four weeks.

But: We’re getting about $4 a week for The Wall Street Journal… [voice trails off].

So this would be about entertainment as well?

Oh, you bet. Everyone’s been talking about negotiating with Apple.

[Both Rupert and FT's Ken Li seem confused. Me too.]

How much did you invest in Wall Street Journal New York edition?

Rupert. “Happy to tell you. We invested nothing.” Maybe $1 million in it. But ti already covers its costs. The notion that we’re spending $30 million on it is “BS.”

[Sorry, missed next two questions.]

Soon to-be Murdoch employee Claire Atkinson has questions about TV ads and online video ads.

Murdoch: WSJ.com is up 11 percent. $100 million in digital revenue at Dow Jones. At Fox news.com, “absolutely thriving.” [If he answered TV question, I didn't hear it, but I think he passed on that one.]

That’s all, folks.

Last week, Comedy Central’s Jon Stewart spoofs Fox News’s Glenn Beck in a blackboard parody almost as good as Tina Fey’s spot-on impression of Sarah Palin on “Saturday Night Live.”

The conservative pundits seem to be the online comedy gift that keeps on giving.

Here it is in two videos:

Just like other parts of the world, Silicon Valley has its own special magic during the holidays. We gather together around the old-timey glow of a CRT monitor and drag out our old CDs–especially the ones that say things like “Sign up for AOL now and receive 500 hours free.” With the familiar tone of a dial-up modem log-in on the stereo, we can almost smell the sweet aroma of irrational exuberance of holidays past. It’s this seasonal magic of limitless possibility that captured the tech word this week, featuring the miracle of rebirth, new jobs, and the greatest miracle of all, a possible Verizon (VZ) iPhone.

Kara soothed some furrowed brows with her NPR voice early in the week, before heading out to New York to attend the Diddy-studded relaunch party of Aol (AOL). She said that the real miracle of Aol seems to be its incredible resilience. Weekend Update thinks the 25-year-old online player was bitten by a radioactive roach sometime in the late 80s—it’s the only explanation. In any case, at the event, Kara caught former CBS (CBS) interactive head Quincy Smith on camera briefly and followed with a post about his part in a new niche banking venture. She rounded out BoomTown this week with a wrap-up of the party, featuring a little video chat with good ol’ Woz. Apple (APPL) co-founder Steve Wozniak was his usual jolly self, which got Weekend Update to thinking: He’s friendly, loves gadgets more than any human should and always seems to be sequestered in some workshop, toiling away before emerging for special occasions. We might be getting a little “Glenn Beck” paranoid here, but Woz and Claus do rhyme.

Digital Daily was in the holiday spirit too and brought us some prognostications a la the ghost of Christmas future. AT&T (T) is foretelling a grave future if it can’t get its coverage in order. No “incentive” programs are in place yet, but the company did release an app that allows users to geo-tag locations where service is bad, though we’re not sure yet what they’ll do with the data. More iPhones on the network plus lack of action may slow down connection speeds so much that even Jacob Marley could beat AT&T in a bandwidth race, and we’re pretty sure he’s wrapped in chains. While AT&T grapples with correcting its own network transgressions, John posted about a prognostication from an industry analyst who says that as time progresses we’re increasingly likely to see a Verizon iPhone. While the analysis is complex, the math is simple. Over time, Apple will see fewer and fewer iPhone converts at AT&T as the carrier slowly slurps up those remaining in the bottom of the cup. Moral of the story: We may start hearing that sucking sound between 2010 and 2012. John finished out the week with a snapshot of Aol. There were fewer sugarplums and candy canes and more about the long, wintery walk ahead of the oddly new Internet player. The reality is that shares in the post-spinoff Aol were down a few points, even as management was doing its best to put on a brave face. Sometimes a fruitcake is still a fruitcake, even if you gift-wrap it.

MediaMemo was in the holiday spirit too, even if the world of media is a little more somber this holiday season. Peter started things off with coverage of a new Nielsen report that puts TV viewing down somewhat, even as Internet video viewership rises. While one explanation might be that the screentime balance is finally beginning to shift, Weekend Update has another hypothesis: There are not nearly so many hilarious cat-dressed-as-Santa videos on TV as on the Internet, and that’s just want the holiday viewers want. Arguably, the biggest shakeup this week was over at Facebook, where the elves have been working feverishly on yet another privacy agreement. Peter reported that king elf Zuckerberg thinks sharing is the best default and sort of puts his profile where his mouth is (even if he keeps certain data, like his cellphone number, just for his friends). Finally, not to be left out of the Aol party, Peter also delivered some insight about the shape of things to come with a post about New York Times veteran Saul Hansell heading over to do some kind of work in Aol’s new content factory. No word yet on what sort of gift this particular wise man will be delivering.

Walt and Katie were in full swing this week, working hard to make sense of some of those last-minute gift items. Personal Technology was devoted to the Nook, a much anticipated e-reader from Barnes and Noble (BKS). Similar to the Amazon (AMZN) Kindle in its display capabilities, the Nook sets itself apart, in theory, by augmenting its text display with a small color screen to aid navigation. Walt said this one needed a little more time in the workshop and that future iterations may take better advantage of the interesting dual-screen idea. Mossberg’s Mailbox wasn’t full of tins of cookies yet, but Walt did answer some mail about the end of Microsoft (MSFT) Money for the Mac and recording all your favorite shows onto a computer. He also helped one wayward would-be smartphone owner examine options less costly than the Motorola (MOT) Droid. Katie came to every mom’s rescue with a great post breaking down the Wii, Xbox and Playstation 3 field. If that weren’t enough, she includes a cheat sheet of features and options that will take the confusion out of the impending trip through your favorite electronics superstore gauntlet.

While we’re not yet roasting chestnuts (Kara hates it when we start fires in the office), AllThingsD most certainly is getting its stockings hung with care. Is it weird that we are noshing on a potato latke while we do that? Either way, stay tuned to the AllThingsD crew, and please feel free to leave comments–no one likes an empty mailbox during the holidays. Weekend Update will catch you again next week.

What in the world can one make of the new ad for the Droid, the Motorola (MOT) smartphone with Google (GOOG) Android software on the Verizon Wireless (VZ) network, which apparently put out this commercial?

Here’s what: It aggressively calls the Apple (AAPL) iPhone a dumb blonde and then a prissy dude in need of a beatdown.

Let’s put it this way: The 30-second clip makes Glenn Beck look like Gloria Steinem and Adam Lambert combined!

Earlier advertising for the Droid has been clearly aimed at the he-man demographic, with a beer-commercial tone and a growly-voiced announcer.

So what? That’s marketing 101. But this one–titled “Pretty”–goes entirely too far.

“Should a phone be pretty?” it begins, using an odd series of images that is packed full of random misogyny. “Should it be a tiara-wearing, digitally clueless beauty pageant queen?”

Then comes all the manly imagery–a racehorse, a powerfully pointed Scud missile, bananas and buzzsaws to represent the Droid. A surging missile, as well as several creamy explosions too. Get it?

And let’s not forget the bunch of fey, effeminately-dressed mannequins, with one getting bashed with an ink-filled ball thrown by some tough masked thug with the line, “Is it a precious porcelain figurine of a phone?”

Then back to anti-women name-calling, saying an iPhone is a “princess,” unlike the Droid, “a phone that trades hair-do for can-do.”

It is true that sometime a phone ad is just a phone ad–but, in this case, sometimes it’s just appalling. It would be funny, if it weren’t so mean-spirited.

But, please, you be the judge of the video of the television commercial, which is on Verizon Wireless’ YouTube site:

But–as many readers have requested–they will all be available in their entirety over the next weeks in this column.

Here’s Part 4 of 4 of an interview I did with Time Warner’s CEO, Jeff Bewkes.

(I will be posting one video part of the discussion with Bewkes every day this week through today.)

As you will see, Bewkes is a live wire, sassing me about the hard time I was giving him about the rough road AOL has had as a Time Warner (TWX) property.

In this video, Bewkes takes questions from the audience about CNN, Glenn Beck and Lou Dobbs, Bebo, content, the greening of Time Warner and he also gets in a stats tussle with Yahoo’s media head Scott Moore (pictured here).