Our little girl has, um, certainly grown up.

In fact, so much so that this music video for a new single–titled “Who Owns My Heart?”–from Miley Cyrus is causing a major ruckus, with complaints from groups such as the Parents Television Council.

That’s due to the racy themes and extreme writhing in dark clubs, I suppose, which seems kind of old hat by now.

In any case, with it, the 17-year-old singer is definitively declaring an end to her Disney (DIS) past.

Most definitely, as you will see here:

This holiday season, more games than ever are being geared toward female players. Electronic Arts Inc. (ERTS) is releasing the latest installment of its “Littlest Pet Shop” game for young girls and introducing a series of fashion-themed games called “Charm Girls Club” for older girls later this month. Sony Corp. (SNE) in August packaged a lilac version of its PlayStation Portable device with a “Hannah Montana” game, based on the popular television show about a girl and her secret pop career.

Publishers also will target women with workout games. Ubisoft Entertainment SA is introducing “Your Shape,” a personal-training game, and “Just Dance,” a dancing game, in November. Nintendo Co. hit the market with “Wii Fit Plus,” a sequel to its popular fitness game, in September.

Read the rest of this post on the original site

The story went up on VF.com six days ago and has generated just under two million page views since then, says executive online editor Michael Hogan. (Disclosure: I’ve been a free-lance contributor to Vanity Fair’s “New Establishment” list in the past and will be again this year). Had Palin not made her blockbuster announcement on the Friday before the Fourth of July, the piece would be doing even better: Vanity Fair generated more traffic on the Tuesday the story was posted than the day after Palin made her news.

Still, it’s a big coup for the magazine’s site. The only way to generate more attention would be to run a slideshow featuring young attractive women.

Which the site can also do: Its story-and-photo package on Jessica Simpson, which ran in May, attracted 5.5 million page views to the site over a two-day period. Vanity Fair has generated 85 million page views so far this year, Hogan says.

And if you really want to generate traffic, run slideshows featuring very young attractive women. Last year the magazine’s 18-picture slideshow featuring a kind-of-topless Miley “Hannah Montana” Cyrus attracted some 18 million page views in a couple of days.

None of that will be terribly surprising to people who’ve wallowed in Web publishing for any amount of time. What surprised me a bit, though, was Vanity Fair’s decision to publish the piece in its entirety from the start. Doesn’t that cannibalize newsstand sales?

Maybe, says Hogan. But “it’s an open question as to what costs newsstand and what doesn’t.” And as the magazine tries to figure that out, he says, it has been experimenting. Some stuff goes up online before the magazine hits newsstands, while other pieces won’t appear on the site until a month later.

In the case of the Palin piece, the magazine had originally prepared to run an excerpt/summary of the story at first, then make the whole thing available by the end of the month after the news cycle was extinguished.

But on Friday, June 26, a few days before the excerpt was scheduled to run online, the magazine rethought its plan, assuming that the piece would be widely quoted and discussed before most people would ever see it. “The PR department started getting concerned that it was going to be controversial, and they wanted people to read the whole thing, and draw their own conclusions,” Hogan says. The final call went to Editor-in-Chief Graydon Carter, who, I gather, isn’t really much of a Web guy.

Meanwhile, I’m still waiting to read Michael Lewis’s latest piece for the magazine, on AIG’s (AIG) notorious “financial products” division. That one’s only available, for now, in excerpt form online, which means I’m actually going to have pay cash to read it, or wait a few hours–Hogan says it should be available in full later today.

A billion dollar investment in digital technologies, struck between a handful of Hollywood studios and a consortium of big theater chains, got little notice earlier this week.

Under terms of the deal, the entertainment companies agreed to help defray the costs of rolling out more advanced digital technologies in 20,000 theaters, which will eventually lead to being able to see more movies using technologies like 3-D.

Even though there will be about two dozen 3-D movies released in the next few years–think Hannah Montana and the Jonas Brothers in concert popping out of screens–a very small number of theaters across the U.S. can handle the advanced technology 3-D requires.

Why? Well, it apparently costs about $70,000 to upgrade a screen. While studios are only paying a small fraction of that cost, one hopes they understand that upgrading theater facilities will be increasingly important in the years ahead.

Because while the gimmick of getting audiences to wear polarized lenses–yes, you still need them–3-D alone is probably not what will prompt most people to up their movie theater attendance (although 3-D movies do attract more people and command much higher prices).

But, even as digital technologies have exploded everywhere, the theater experience has changed in a negligible way over time.

While questions swirl around whether such upgrades pay off, there is no question it will be hard to know without some effort on behalf of the entertainment industry.

One might imagine a much more immersive theater experience or new ideas from filmmakers–I am not creative enough to come up with any good ones–to amplify a movie.

So we’ll just have to wait for Hollywood to come up with something–well beyond Miley Cyrus or Nick Jonas jumping right into the seats.

Now, Disney (DIS) and CBS (CBS) already offer those same shows for viewing on the same day-after-original air date schedule on their own Web sites (though they aren’t presented commercial-free as they will be on Netflix). But that doesn’t seem to matter to Netflix (NFLX), which is clearly positioning itself as a one-stop shop for online delivery of movies and television shows.

And doing quite well at it, I might add. Wedbush Morgan Securities analyst Michael Pachter estimates that between 10 and 20 percent of Netflix’s 8.4 million subscribers use the company’s streaming service regularly.

In what is likely to turbocharge its heft in the digital space, according to an internal email sent out by Walt Disney (DIS) CEO Bob Iger, the entertainment company is combining its Disney Interactive Studios and the Walt Disney Internet Group.

The new unit, called Disney Interactive Media Group–will be headed by WDIG’s Steve Wadsworth.

WDIG has a wide range of properties, like Club Penguin and Disney.com. Disney Interactive Studios makes a range of games for Disney brands like “Hannah Montana” and “Wall-E.”

Here’s the memo, with email address removed:

From: Bob Iger
Sent: Wed Jun 04 19:44:22 2008
Subject: Disney Interactive Media Group (DIMG)

Bob