Then again, Wall Street has minimal expectations for AOL (AOL) for at least a couple quarters, so Armstrong didn’t need to do much to meet them.

After factoring out one-time charges, AOL posted earnings of 71 cents per share on revenue of $810 million. Wall Street expected earnings of either 62 cents or 66 cents per share, depending on who you ask, on revenue of around $766 million.

And while advertising revenue was lousy, it wasn’t as bad as Wall Street had expected–it dropped eight percent, and analysts had assumed it would show a double-digit decline. Subscription revenue, which still drives the company, though, dropped more quickly than analysts assumed, down 28 percent.

Again, recall that these numbers are against miserable comps from a year ago, when advertisers and publishers just sat in the dark with towels over their heads, crying. So the fact that AOL is still declining shows you how much of a challenge Armstrong faces as he retools both his salesforce and his sales strategy.

Here’s the revenue breakdown (click tables to enlarge):

Here’s Citigroup (C) analyst Mark Mahaney’s ever-helpful “cheat sheet” for interpreting the results, if you’re playing along at home.

That won’t help employees at Time Warner’s Time Inc. publishing unit: The company confirmed that it will make big cuts this quarter and spend up to $100 million on restructuring charges. This is different from the $100 million in cuts that had been previously reported, but it will still mean hundreds of layoffs at the publisher.

Time Warner also boosted its guidance for the remainder of the year and confirmed once again that it wants to spin off AOL before the end of the year. As well it should: The company said it has already spent a staggering $24 million on the spinoff so far this year, which includes $9 million in “pretax direct transaction costs (e.g., legal and professional fees).” It has spent another $83 million in restructuring charges at that unit in 2009.

As usual, Time Warner said ad sales have been lousy, but that its cable networks and film divisions had done okay. The breakdown:

• Cable networks: Revenue up five percent, because subscriber fees were up nine percent. Ad revenue was down one percent.
• Warner Bros. movie studio: Revenue down four percent, because of slumping DVD sales.
• Time Inc.: Revenue down 18 percent; advertising down 22 percent. Adjusted operating income down 42 percent. Hence the coming cuts.
• AOL: Revenue down 23 percent. Subscription revenue, which will continue to shrink, was down another 29 percent, and ad revenue, which is supposed to improve one day, was down 18 percent.

Viacom (VIA) says Q3 ad sales dropped four percent in the U.S., which is two points better than Q2. Companywide, revenue dropped three percent to $3.3 billion, which is what Wall Street expected, but the company slashed enough costs to produce an earnings surprise: After adjusting for one-time charges, Viacom posted earnings of 69 cents a share, well above the 57-cent consensus.

The company’s overall results do a nice job of illustrating why media companies and investors are so enamored of cable TV these days: Even though ads are slumping, the company was able to wring more out of cable system providers (and their subscribers), which more or less kept overall cable revenue flat.

Viacom’s movie business is much less meaningful than its TV operations, but in this case, it underperformed enough to drag the rest of the business down. Viacom blames a six percent drop on crummy DVD sales, which it says suffered compared with strong results a year ago.

But every studio in Hollywood is grappling with crummy DVD sales: The only real question is whether that’s a function of the economy or something larger.

I’ll  listen in on the call (8:30 am ET) and report back if there’s anything else worth noting.

UPDATE: CEO Philippe Dauman mentions the new “Sponge Bob Tickler” for the Apple (AAPL) iPhone app, which I believe means that at least one Viacom employee has won a private bet. Waiting to hear more about Q4 guidance.

The core question: Are Dauman and other Viacom execs mildly optimistic about recovery because of an easy comparison with a year ago or because ads are really coming back? A little of both, Dauman says: “Right now the tone is feeling better, but we have to be cautious.”

The company’s shares spiked, rising about 20 percent to 54 cents on news of the government’s expanded “Cash for Clunkers” program and the positive impact it should have on new car sales and, by extension, new Sirius subscriptions. That analysts had been predicting a second-quarter loss for the satellite radio company, along with the loss of thousands of subscribers, did little to temper enthusiasm. Though it seems to have done so today, now that those predictions have proven true.

Reporting second-quarter earnings this morning, Sirius posted a net loss of $157.3 million, or four cents a share on revenue that rose one percent to $590.8 million. Excluding one-time charges, though, Sirius lost only a penny a share, matching analyst estimates.

As analysts had foreseen, subscriber count slipped again. Sirius ended the quarter with 18.4 million subscribers–a one percent drop from a year ago. All told, the company lost 185,999 net subscribers during the period. And that’s prior to the addition of a $2 royalty fee.

Looking ahead, the satellite radio operator raised its outlook for the year, cautiously optimistic that the car sales that drive subscriptions will pick up in the second half of this year.

“Based on these results we are increasing guidance again and expect to exceed over $400 million in adjusted income from operations during 2009,” CEO Mel Karmazin said in an earnings release. “Growing our revenue in the face of broad declines in the advertising and automotive markets is a remarkable accomplishment, and we are well positioned for a rebound in auto sales.”

Shares in Sirius are trading down 7.41 percent at 50 cents as I write this, which is still 10 times their 52 week low. And, to be fair, they are up almost 10 cents in last 10 trading days and up about 320 percent year-to-date.

The publisher was able to take a big chunk out of operating costs, knocking them down 20 percent. But revenue fell faster. The paper did say, though, that things got less bad as the quarter progressed, and that they’ll get slightly less bad next quarter, too.

The numbers: After factoring out one-time charges and benefits, the Times posted earnings of eight cents per share, well above the four-cent loss the Street was expecting. But revenue dropped 21 percent, to $585 million; the consensus was $603 million.

The Times posted an operating profit of $23.3 million; without one-time charges that number would have been $66.1 million. That’s worse than the $100 million the paper made a year ago, but much better than the $74.5 million it lost (net) in Q1.

But! Ad revenue declined 30.2 percent, an acceleration from last quarter’s 28 percent drop. In addition to the regular culprits, the Times noted a “lower volume of online advertising.” More details on that: Internet revenue dropped a shocking 14.3 percent, and Internet ad revenue was down 15.5 percent; last quarter they were down 5.6 percent and 6.1 percent.

The assessment from Times CEO Janet Robinson:

Based on what we have seen so far in July, we expect the advertising environment to continue to be challenging. We believe the rate of decline will moderate slightly in the third quarter from what we experienced in the second quarter.

As we look ahead, an enduring constant is the outstanding journalism of The New York Times Company and the esteem in which it is held by our readers. For the balance of the year, we are focused on developing innovative new products and platforms based on our high-quality journalism, particularly in the digital area, and continuing to aggressively lower our cost base to better align it with our revenues. When the economy and ad markets improve, we believe we will be very well positioned to benefit from the restructuring of our business.

For its third quarter, the company posted a profit Wednesday that fell 24 percent from a year earlier but still beat expectations. Sales slipped 17 percent. The specifics: Revenue topped out at $8.16 billion, down from $9.79 billion for the same period last year but better than the $8.07 billion analysts had expected. Sales were $8.2 billion, topping analysts’ forecasts of $8.1 billion. Excluding one-time charges for acquisition costs, Cisco (CSCO) earned 30 cents per share, a nickel more than the Street had been looking for.

So, overall, a good report that exceeded expectations with numbers that, by any standard, are pretty damn ugly. “Cisco delivered solid financial performance despite a challenging global economy and period of evolving market dynamics,” said CEO John Chambers. “These results demonstrate our ability to drive operational excellence and manage profitability across varying economic cycles.”

One way of putting it, I suppose. Certainly investors are eating it up. Cisco shares rose on the news.