Thanks for 500 shows. All we ask is that you go out and get some fresh air before logging onto the internet and saying how much this sucked.

– The note at the end of Sunday’s episode of “The Simpsons“

EARLIER:
One new twist in the Cablevision-News Corp. fight: News Corp. has cut off Cablevision subscribers’ access to its shows on Hulu, the video site joint venture, as well as on its own Fox.com.

Here’s a screenshot from Fortune.com columnist Seth Weintraub, taken this afternoon when he tried to watch a Fox show on the site, which is co-owned by News Corp., Disney’s ABC and GE’s NBC Universal:

News Corp.’s comment, via Fox Networks PR guy Scott Grogin: “Fox.com and Fox content on hulu is unavailable to Cablevision subscribers.”

And here’s Hulu PR rep Elisa Schreiber:

Unfortunately, we were put in a position of needing to block Fox content on Hulu in order to remain neutral during contract negotiations between Fox and Cablevision. This only includes Fox content. All other Hulu content is accessible to Cablevision internet subscribers. We regret the impact on Cablevision customers and look forward to returning Fox content to those users as soon as possible.

This is an important escalation from News Corp. (which owns this Web site) in its fight to extract more dollars from its cable partners.

In the past, cable subscribers who couldn’t get Fox shows during fee disputes were still able to watch some of them via Hulu. I know that News Corp. has discussed shutting off access to the site during past fee fights, but as far as I know this is the first time they’ve actually done it.

It’s also a logical move, at least from News Corp.’s perspective.

If it’s trying to increase the pain felt by Cablevision and its subscribers, it may as well use every tool it has. And in the past, the Web has been used against programmers like Fox in these fights: Last year, when Time Warner Cable was fighting with News Corp., it prepared a video showing customers how to find their favorite shows on sites like Hulu.

But while the move is certain to rile up the digerati (astonished industry executive to me, over the phone, just now: “That is crazy!) I’m not sure how much real impact it will have in the fight.

News Corp.’s most valuable weapon is access to the Phillies-Giants playoff game tonight, and the New York Giants-Detroit Lions game tomorrow.

Both are scheduled to air on Fox, and many of Cablevision’s three million subscribers who live in the New York area will holler loudly if they can’t see them. But they wouldn’t be able to see them on Hulu or Fox.com, anyway.

Instead, those sites are used to show reruns of Fox broadcast shows. That means Cablevision subs can’t see Sunday night’s episode of “The Simpsons” on Monday, but that’s not the same kind of impact.

But Hulu Plus can’t show subscribers all of the episodes of all the shows in Hulu’s catalog. Rights issues mean that certain shows will flit on and off the service, and it’s up to subscribers to figure that out for themselves.

Example: “Modern Family,” ABC’s award-winning hit sitcom, disappeared from both Hulu and Hulu Plus this summer after its first season. Now it’s back. But both services are only offering shows from the current season–there’s no way to go back and catch up on last year’s shows, even if you’re paying.

I think, but haven’t been able to confirm, that this has to do with DVD sales for the show, which is produced by News Corp.’s (NWS) 20th Century Fox. I’ve got queries into both Fox and Disney’s (DIS) ABC to try to confirm.

Meantime, here’s what Hulu has to say:

Yes, the first season of Modern Family is no longer on Hulu Plus. We acknowledge this can sometimes be confusing for TV fans, so we do all we can to provide as much advance notice as possible when shows are slated to come down. Below is an example from our Saturday Night Live show page on Hulu Plus. You’ll notice it says “New episodes are posted Sunday afternoons and are available for 17 days.” This is consistent across all our content.

Of course, we keep content on Hulu and Hulu Plus for as long as possible. We can’t offer a specific reasons why a particular video may be taken down, as streaming clearances differ from show to show.

And sure enough, if you head to each show’s Hulu page, you’ll find a different set of availabilities.

Regular Hulu users can only see the last five episodes of “The Family Guy,” for instance, while Hulu Plus subscribers can see all nine seasons. But even if you’re a paying customer, Hulu can only show you five episodes of “The Simpsons,” period.

Meanwhile, the last season of “Lost” fell off both the free and paid services last month, and the other five seasons will go away at the end of the year. Etc.

To be fair to Hulu, it’s certainly not the only service negotiating the frustrating rights/windows patchwork. Everyone who deals with digital media has to navigate this stuff. And none of it makes sense to viewers who just want to watch their shows, when they want to watch them.

But the patchwork is a bigger deal for Hulu, because the service’s primary pitch is that it’s a one-stop shop for all your TV viewing (or at least your broadcast TV viewing). Instead it’s really closer to a half-stocked Super Target: There’s a lot of stuff in there, but you still may not find what you need.

Hulu competitor Netflix (NFLX) offers lots of TV shows via its paid streaming service, too. But it pointedly doesn’t play up the presence of any particular show–Reed Hastings and company simply tell consumers that they’ll find shows they like.

But if you’ve ponied up $10 a month for Hulu Plus and find that you still can’t watch a show that aired a few months ago, you may not be cool with that at all.

Gaps in Hulu’s free service may not be as frustrating for users, because they’re not out any cash. But it is a problem for the joint venture as it ponders a public offering, premised on the notion that its TV partners/owners–ABC, Fox and GE/Comcast’s NBC–are in it for the long haul.

But if Hulu can’t tell users that it has all the rights it needs, how can it convince investors?

Meanwhile, a similarly confusing story:

But assuming that last night’s episode of “The Simpsons” did as well as last week’s show, something like 7 million people saw another version of Mark Zuckerberg — portrayed by Mark Zuckerberg.

The Facebook CEO has yet to acknowledge his appearance on his Facebook page. But Facebook PR boss Brandee Barker is beaming (on Twitter):

Apple (AAPL) has been pushing the TV networks to get on board for the iPad launch, but the industry is in no rush. Like everyone else in media, TV execs are trying to figure out what the iPad means for their pricing power. Which means people who are used to watching lots of free top-tier TV on the Web won’t get the same experience on the iPad this weekend.

Meanwhile, the networks have resisted Apple’s lobbying to drop prices on the stuff they sell at the iTunes store. So if you want to watch the latest episode of “The Simpsons” on your iPad this weekend, it’s still going to cost you $1.99 (and $2.99 for high-def).

And while Hulu is building an app for the iPad, the plan, as I reported in February, is to make it part of a subscription offering. That’s scheduled to roll out sometime this year, but it won’t be ready in two days.

Where things stand now:

• Hulu has the basics of a subscription plan, which includes access to an iPad app, worked out, sources tell me. But it will take a while for the company to negotiate rights clearances. A key part of the plan is to offer users the ability to watch Hulu on mobile devices, and the joint venture needs to wrangle permission from its programming partners to do that. So no Hulu app Saturday. When might we see one? Within “single digit months,” says an insider with a wry sense of humor.
• Apple, which pushed a TV subscription service last fall, switched gears in recent months and tried persuading TV executives to cut their iTunes prices to 99 cents. But executives at two of the big four broadcast networks–CBS and Fox–have told me they’re not dropping prices on their big shows right now. No word from Disney’s (DIS) ABC or GE’s (GE) NBC yet. It’s possible that ABC, which has tight ties to Apple CEO Steve Jobs and is already promoting the iPad on its shows, may drop prices unilaterally. But my understanding is that Apple was aiming for across-the-board cuts.
• As The Wall Street Journal notes, both CBS (CBS) and ABC are planning to deliver free TV to the iPad on Saturday. ABC will do so via an app, and the Journal says it could have a “a large number” of shows at launch. But CBS, which will use a Web site customized for the device, will have only one full-length program–“Survivor”–and some short clips. You can blame encoding issues for the limited offering, but if CBS really wanted to get a lot of stuff on the iPad at launch, it would.
• One intriguing possibility for Saturday: There are reports of a Netflix (NFLX) app that would let subscribers to the company’s “Watch Instantly” service use it on the iPad. That’s not free. But it would be cool.

Let’s just say the firing of AOL CEO Randy Falco and President Ron Grant was not exactly expected–even if everyone thought it should happen–within the high ranks of the troubled online unit, until Time Warner (TWX) CEO Jeff Bewkes dropped the guillotine this afternoon in Manhattan.

And drop it he did, quickly lopping off the pair of executives Bewkes had installed himself. He replaced them with Tim Armstrong, Google’s head of advertising sales, a man with a much brighter resume, for what is likely to be an attempt to spin out AOL now that merger options are moribund.

“It’s a shock to everyone how sudden it was,” said one exec. “Everyone talked about when Bewkes was going to run out of patience with Randy and Ron all the time, but no one knew it was coming now, since it had taken so long.”

Grant, for example, only found out about the situation when Bewkes told him in person earlier today at AOL’s offices in lower Manhattan, said several sources. Bewkes has hardly ever been there–he has a stunning office at the Time Warner Center in midtown–although Armstrong’s office at Google is nearby.

Falco might have learned about the situation earlier, but several sources said no other top exec at AOL did until about 30 minutes ago.

The whole coup came, said several sources, from corporate, which swooped and made the moves swiftly, very quickly after signing the deal with Armstrong.

(Here is an interview I did this afternoon with Armstrong after the appointment was announced.)

AOL PR did not seem to be aware of the move until this afternoon, and neither did its three top division heads: People Networks head Joanna Shields, MediaGlow President Bill Wilson or newly hired Platform-A ad leader Greg Coleman.

Yesterday, quite by coincidence, BoomTown wrote about the continued turmoil within AOL and the unhappiness with Falco, which was long-running:

“That’s caused a lot of people inside AOL and also a wider circle at Time Warner to increasingly point the finger of blame at AOL CEO Randy Falco, wondering if and when he will suffer too.

“‘Why Randy Falco gets to keep his job is a mystery to a lot of people,’ said one top exec at another division.”

Well, it is a mystery no longer, apparently, with Bewkes putting the high-profile Armstrong in place as AOL’s CEO and chairman, although he has been casting about for new leadership for a while, according to many sources, such as former Yahoo COO Dan Rosensweig.

AOL is in the midst of laying off 10 percent of its staff of 7,000, although many feel deeper cuts are needed, especially since Bewkes has been unable to complete a deal to sell it after a lot of trying.

Interest by Yahoo (YHOO) in merging with AOL, for example, has cooled and there seem to be no true suitors on the horizon. A spinoff of the division seems to be the most likely option.

Whether that includes a strategy reset for AOL or not is unclear.

Under Falco and Grant–who were derisively given the nickname Smithers and Burns from “The Simpsons,” and also “Rondy” by some inside the division who did not like them–AOL paid $850 million for the Bebo social-networking site last year, an overpriced move that has grated on many throughout Time Warner.

Under their plan, AOL was focusing on a three-pronged strategy: social networking and communications (People Networks), content (MediaGlow) and advertising (Platform-A).

But new Platform-A head (and former Yahoo sales exec) Coleman–whose business has to drive revenue growth–cannot perform miracles in such a weak environment no matter what cool new products and offerings either People Networks head Shields or MediaGlow president Wilson create.

Armstrong certainly knows sales, as head of sales efforts at Google (GOOG), although he has never operated a business as multi-faceted as AOL, which–despite its troubles–remains huge.

More to come soon…

Luckily, we have the Internet for that.

Right now, you can find clips of the episode throughout Google’s YouTube, where they’re technically not supposed to be. (Though in truth, Fox’s copyright patrol has never seemed that zealous about getting Simpsons stuff off the site.)

More to the point, you can find the entire episode on Hulu, the joint venture between News Corp.’s (NWS) Fox and GE’s (GE) NBC (News Corp. is the owner of this Web site). And Hulu will also allow anyone–say, a blogger who covers the media business–to embed all of the episode, or a selected clip, on his or her site. (Per a reader’s gentle suggestion, I’ll note that this episode is also available at Fox.com. But Fox.com doesn’t provide embedding options.)

That’s the kind of flexibility that’s now old hat in the Web world, but it’s worth noting how far along the networks have come in a very short time: A few years ago NBC was still trying to stop YouTube from showing millions of people the “Lazy Sunday” clip from “Saturday Night Live.” Now all of us expect to see the networks’ best stuff online, with their blessing, just a few hours after it airs. And the networks are happy to oblige.

This still doesn’t solve the dollars-to-pennies dilemma that NBC chief Jeff Zucker and other media bosses fret about: The content the media companies can charge a lot of money for in its original state (on TV, on paper, etc.) is worth much less once it gets to the Web.

But that’s a lot to absorb early on a post-holiday Monday. For now, here are three minutes of “The Simpsons” at the Apple (sorry, Mapple) store.

And, no surprise, he is the No. 1 choice of most inside and outside Yahoo (YHOO) in the wake of the news late yesterday that current CEO and co-founder Jerry Yang is stepping down.

And why not? Chernin has the right resume: Experienced at running large and complex organizations; savvier than most in media about the Internet; able to make the kinds of dramatic decisions needed; and, perhaps best of all, signaling–via the Los Angeles Times–just this past week that he was open to leaving the powerful media and entertainment conglomerate for something new.

Well, Yahoo would certainly be new for Chernin, in terms of a corporate cleanup challenge, especially compared to figuring out how to make bank on plush toys from “The Simpsons.”

And, while the risks are many, if Chernin (pictured here) managed to turn around Yahoo, he could make a huge fortune too, given Yahoo shares have languished of late, much in the same way they did when former CEO Terry Semel came to Yahoo from Hollywood in 2001.

But it’s not altogether clear whether Chernin would actually leave his powerful perch at News Corp. (NWS) — which owns Dow Jones and owns this Web site. He has been ensconced there for a dozen years, building a huge reputation as a sharp exec (No, Peter, I am not kissing up, as I think Yahoo would wear even you down very, very quickly).

That’s even though many note he is not likely to take over as CEO from its iconic leader, Rupert Murdoch. The media mogul is widely expected to favor one of his own children to lead News Corp. next.

And the 57-year-old Chernin already makes close to $30 million in his current job, which is definitely challenging.

And, although Chernin has been involved in the News Corp.-owned MySpace and has had success backing the Hulu online video site, it is not nearly as hard as the five-year turnaround quagmire (plus no fabulous media mogul perks either) that Yahoo could turn out to be.

In addition, privately to other News Corp. execs, Chernin has regularly pooh-poohed a move to a digital company, even though he is always on the short list for a lot of big Internet jobs — such as the long-unfilled post as digital head at Microsoft (MSFT) more recently.

So, who else to take over from Yang, who will return to his job as Chief Yahoo after stepping down from the company as soon a search for a replacement CEO is successful?

Well, here is BoomTown’s own shortish list, based on asking a wide range of people inside and outside Yahoo, all of whom are important digital players in their own right.

INSIDE YAHOO

Sue Decker:

The current president of Yahoo is certainly being “considered” for the job, which is a polite term for not really being considered at all. While Decker is an intelligent and thoughtful exec, like a politician with a record, she has had her hand on the operating tiller at Yahoo for too long not to get deservedly blamed for its current situation.

In addition, she is radioactive to big investors, who have told the Yahoo board in no uncertain terms that she is a nonstarter.

Maggie Wilderotter:

The former Microsoft exec, who has also been a public company CEO, is an interesting idea floated by some, who think the Yahoo board might turn to one of its own directors, as a short-term solution to stabilize Yahoo.

Wilderotter has been much focused, said several Yahoo execs, on cost-cutting at Yahoo and certainly is not as tarnished, being a more current board member. But she is a largely unknown quantity in the Internet space and, most importantly, at Yahoo.

John Chapple:

The former CEO of Nextel is one of the two board members (former media Frank Biondi Jr. is the other) recently picked by Carl Icahn, when the activist shareholder was admitted on the board as part of the proxy fight settlement.

Chapple has, sources said, been conducting chats with Yahoo execs lately, perhaps as a way to get a lay of the land. If he got the job, it would be clear Icahn had won his Pyrrhic victory (and personal financial defeat) against Yang.

OUTSIDE YAHOO

Dan Rosensweig:

The very funny, but brash, former Yahoo COO is definitely a favorite within Yahoo’s ranks, except for those who don’t like him. But it’s clear Rosensweig does know and love Yahoo, is close to Yang and, ironically, enjoys a tight relationship with Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer, who also wanted him for the digital head job.

Also, Rosensweig, who does have operating chops, has gotten some much needed time away from Yahoo, as a partner at the tony media investment firm, the Quadrangle Group.

Meg Whitman:

Another dreamy CEO choice, except she has already been a big company CEO at eBay (EBAY), has proved her mettle in building it to a powerhouse–despite the online auction site’s currently harder times–and has the giant fortune to prove it.

And, oh yes, she is likely to be using that pile of cash to run for governor of California, on the Republican ticket.

Jon Miller/Ross Levinsohn:

The Bobbsey Twins of the Internet, the pair are now having a very good time running their own investment company, the Velocity Group.

But, aside from some questioning whether he can make the quick decisions needed at Yahoo, Miller (pictured here on the right), the former head of AOL, does not want to leave his New York home and cannot take any job anyway until his noncompete with Time Warner (TWX) runs out in March.

And former Fox Interactive Media head Levinsohn likes Los Angeles, and probably is too fast a personality for Yahoo (his going there would be a shock to its system, but would be endlessly entertaining to me personally).

Tim Armstrong:

The top ad exec at Google (GOOG) certainly is an interesting idea, although has little of the product experience needed to run Yahoo. But he is a well-respected advertising figure–where Yahoo needs to shine–and could do well with a lot of strong execs under him.

He is also not on a CEO path at Google–paging, Larry Page!–and could be interested in proving he could run a company on his own.

Kevin Johnson:

The former Microsoft exec was supposed to be running Yahoo, if he and Ballmer pulled off their takeover attempt earlier this year. They did not, and Johnson then left Microsoft to run Juniper Networks (JNPR) in Silicon Valley, right up the road from Yahoo, in fact.

But Johnson is likely subject to a noncompete by Microsoft and a strong contract at Juniper too. Still, a very sharp exec, he definitely has the operating, political, technological and digital skills to take on Yahoo. Also, ironically, he and Yang really get along well and like each other, despite the takeover battle.

Of course, there are a lot of other ideas: Disney (DIS) online exec Steve Wadsworth; the outside-the-box choice of former Procter & Gamble (PG) marketing wizard Jim Stengel; Microsoft digital exec Yusuf Mehdi; CBS (CBS) digital head Quincy Smith (whose hyperactive dealmaking would likely lead to a mutant merger between CBS and Yahoo); and former Cisco (CSCO) and current Joost CEO Mike Volpi.

Please post suggestions below or, better yet, send tips to me at here.

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google.

The motto: “I, for one, welcome our new AOL overlords.”

Why shouldn’t they? As BoomTown reported, every Bebo employee has had their previously granted stock options accelerated and fully vested under terms of the deal.

This is typical in acquisitions by the Time Warner (TWX) online subsidiary, since it cannot offer enough of its moribund old media stock.

Unfortunately, those kind of deal terms don’t make for the kind of environment that encourages already jumpy entrepreneurs to stay. In fact, it kind of gives them a free pass to leave.

Still, it is nice to see Bebo minions celebrating their new bosses, including AOL CEO Randy Falco and President Ron Grant, who helmed the Bebo deal.

But to clarify for Bebo staff: Falco and Grant’s nickname at AOL is Smithers and Burns, that lovable pair from “The Simpsons,” and not overlords.

It goes without saying that further errors like this will not be tolerated.