So what to make of Mogulite? Well let’s let our newest cohort Amy Tennery explain its raison d’etre:

Why launch a site about moguls? Now? The reasons range from the absurd to the sensible. For starters: peering into the lives of the ultra-wealthy is fun! Furthermore, many of these people control our everyday lives but don’t like to be seen or scrutinized. This doesn’t make sense to us. Even the most reclusive moguls should be getting just a fraction of the press coverage of the cast of “Dancing with the Stars.” Well, at least I would like to see more moguls on that show… or maybe not.

We’re committed to the idea that what the ultra-wealthy and powerful do matters, as much as many would like to deny it. We’re ready to celebrate those helping to change things for the better – while, on the other hand, highlighting hypocrisy and exposing those secretly serving as puppeteers, to make our lives more treacherous. We’d like to keep apace with the gobstoppingly wealthy — preferably over a round of aged scotch. If we can’t make it into the boardroom, we can at least join you top tax bracket folks at the Harvard Club and share a drink, right? No? Okay, fine. We’ll be at our laptops.

The point is, we’ll be neither sycophantic nor cruel – we will, however, be merciless.

In honor of Mogulite’s launch, we’ve assembled a list of the top ten Media Moguls according to the Mediaite Power Grid. Enjoy!

Except, it wasn’t Joe Sixpack who got stuck, and it was anything but an ordinary ride. Here’s Couric’s tweet:

Only in NY: helping Barry Diller push his Maserati out of the snow in Central Park.

A few things must be said about this photo. First, it looks suspiciously like Couric is posing in front of the car, not pushing. Second, Diller is clearly not involved in any way in the Maserati-freeing. And third, is there anything more unfortunate than an ugly front license plate marring the front end of a Maserati? (Not like I have this problem, mind you, but still…)

Okay, I’m ready to let all of this go now. Thanks for listening.

UPDATE: While the snownario captured above has the look of a staged photo, a CBS rep tells us it happened exactly as Couric tweeted it: the CBS anchor was driving to work and spotted the guy stuck in the park in the Maserati (which, in case you’re not up on your cars, is known for many, many things, but NOT as your first choice for post-snowstorm driving). Couric and friend had the same thought: hmm, that wasn’t a great idea, now was it? As they laughed, they noticed the driver as Diller.

Leading to this priceless moment: a stranded Diller sees a car pull up, the window roll down, and Katie Couric ask “need a lift?”

The anchor–as the photo shows–did try to move the Maserati (who wouldn’t want to put their hands on that car?) but it wouldn’t budge. Couric–ever the good sport–gave Diller a lift.

According to B&C, Diller’s departure comes at the same time as John Malone‘s Liberty Media has decided to dump its entire equity stake in IAC in a deal that gives Liberty $220 million and assets including Evite and Gifts.com.

The new CEO at IAC is Greg Blatt, who comes from Match.com. Here are the official statements:

“It’s been clear to me for some time that this Company needs a full time aggressive and aspirational executive in the CEO role. While I’m not going anywhere, IAC, with its operating businesses growing, large cash resources and virtually no debt, needs the kind of leadership that Greg Blatt can bring it in order to continue to grow and thrive many years into the future,” said. Diller in a statement.

“These last 17 years of my association with John Malone and Liberty Media have been a great, and occasionally, wild ride. We began this grand tour of interactivity a few years before the internet became widely used, and we were able to create, acquire and build up substantial businesses over that time,” Diller added.

“The one constant throughout IAC’s history has been change,” said. Blatt, who joined IAC as general counsel five years ago from Marth Stewart Living Omnimedia. “While I expect that to continue, we intend for the same emphasis on consistent operating performance and disciplined deployment of capital that have defined our recent quarters to guide our decision-making and management as we grow IAC into the future. Our businesses are on solid footing, and our healthy balance sheet and strong operating cash flows put us in a great position to drive solid shareholder returns for the foreseeable future. I couldn’t be more excited about the new position and the opportunities in front of IAC.”

As for Liberty, Malone said that “our 17-year relationship with Barry has been very beneficial in creating value for our shareholders, and this transaction represents an efficient exit for Liberty from our IAC stake. We will continue to work together through Expedia and various other public vehicles created from our association.”

Writing for The Observer, Nick Summers exclusively reports:

It will be a 50-50 merger of the two companies. The editorial staffs will combine under the editorship of Tina Brown, who will again run a high-profile glossy.

Newsweek owner Sidney Harman, 92, and IAC chairman Barry Diller had for weeks disagreed over an operating structure for the hybrid publication. The deal reached today establishes a daily role for Mr. Harman and strong editorial independence for Ms. Brown.

As The Observer reported earlier today, talks between Mr. Harman and Mr. Diller never completely broke down, as the media world thought for weeks. The two men continued to meet and inched toward a deal. Tonight, they are hammering out a couple of sticking points, and will announce the new business tomorrow.

Back in August, the struggling weekly Newsweek was purchased by Sidney Harmon for the amount of $1, plus terms that the audio mogul would take on millions of dollars of debt. Some derided that decision as a vanity play, but if this report is true, he comes out looking like the 50% owner of a white hot property that has both a print ad revenue model and editorial expertise from Ms. Brown. There are sure to be lots of questions to be asked on what the future partnered entity will look like, and alas, this will likely result in lots of redundant positions (job losses) but the good news is that, at least Newsweek will live.

Trivia question: what do The Daily Beast and Newsweek have in common? Both have design elements from the creative force of Bonnie Seigler, who both oversaw the original design elements of The Daily Beast as well as the redesign of Newsweek. Perhaps she was on to something?

Alas, the merger wasn’t meant to be. The Wall Street Journal‘s Russell Adams is now reporting that Brown and her Beast have withdrawn from negotiations with the beleaguered news magazine. Adams’s source is an anonymous “person familiar with the matter.”

According to the reporter, talks broke down because Brown, Newsweek owner Sidney Harman, and Daily Beast chairman-slash-chief executive Barry Diller couldn’t figure out how to play nice with one another:

Talks were hung up on the issue of how control would be divided among the three people, all of whom are heavily invested financially and emotionally in their respective news operations and not inclined to cede control. Mr. Harman, a stereo magnate, recently acquired Newsweek from Washington Post Co.

The person familiar with the matter said talks broke down because the two parties couldn’t come to an agreement on governance and editorial control.

Spokespeople for the Daily Beast and Newsweek weren’t immediately available for comment.

Read Adams’s report in full at WSJ.com.

But what if she didn’t have to?

Keith J. Kelly is reporting that Sidney Harman—the mogul who officially bought Newsweek from the Washington Post Company in August—and Barry Diller may be working out a deal to combine Newsweek‘s digital operations with The Daily Beast. Such a merger would allow Brown to take over as the weekly’s EIC without forcing her to relinquish her position as editor of the Beast.

As of now, Kelly’s report is mostly speculation—he’s basing everything on the fact that Diller and Harmon were spied getting drinks together at the Four Seasons in Washington, D.C. Still, the Newsweek-Beast union (Kelly calls it “News-Beast”) would make financial and practical sense. As Kelly writes,

Diller, who is on the board of the Washington Post Co., would be very familiar with the workings of Newsweek, which lost more than $40 million over the past two years. Harman is reportedly paying $1 to take over the magazine while assuming up to $50 million in costs. … Diller, who reportedly was willing to spend $18 million on the Daily Beast and who remains a big benefactor of Brown’s, would relish a graceful exit to the business, which has struggled for ads from the start and seemingly has little chance of making money in the near future.

Anonymous sources also tell him that Brown has been “obsessed” with the idea of taking over Newsweek since it was announced that Meacham was stepping down. When asked for comment, Brown gave Kelly a statement—”The Daily Beast’s audience and revenues have grown beyond our wildest hopes of two years ago. I have no intention of leaving either it or my wonderful partnership with Barry Diller”—that neither confirms nor dismisses the possibility of the merger.

Mediaite has confirmed the next interview on Katie Couric‘s lengthy weekly web show “@katiecouric” will be with Barry Diller and Tina Brown. Besides Diller and Brown, coming up soon on the show will be interviews with Hugh Jackman and Al Gore.

Besides the new web show, Couric (and an exec at CBS News) are adding even more responsibilities.

Couric will also have a Glamour magazine column. Here’s part of the release, out today:

Award-winning journalist Katie Couric has joined Glamour magazine as a monthly columnist, editor-in-chief Cindi Leive announced today. Couric, the anchor and managing editor of CBS Evening News With Katie Couric, will interview the world’s most captivating women, starting with an exclusive talk with First Lady Michelle Obama for the magazine’s December issue.

In a monthly Q&A column, Couric will explore what makes her subjects so inspiring to other women and girls, something the groundbreaking journalist is particularly interested in. Whether she’s sitting down with a head of state, a pop star or an athlete, Couric will speak with the female figures young women most want to hear from right now—in the candid, intimate, provocative way that only she can.

In other CBS News news, Paul Friedman has been upped to Executive Vice President of CBS News. Here’s the internal memo, sent yesterday, from CBS News & Sports President Sean McManus:

I am very pleased to announce that, effective immediately, Paul Friedman is promoted to Executive Vice President, CBS News.

Paul joined CBS News in April 2006 and, over the past three and a half years, Paul has worked closely with me to improve and upgrade every aspect of CBS News’ capabilities, from technology, to newsgathering to long-term strategic initiatives.

Paul has been involved in every major decision relating to hard news during his tenure at CBS News. Thanks to Paul, the news division has grown stronger behind the scenes and in front of the camera. He has been a leader in helping guide CBS News’ moves to restructure the way we gather news globally. Paul’s news sense is superb and his involvement has been of critical importance on a daily basis as well as during major events, including CBS News’ campaign, conventions and election coverage last year.

Diller is currently funding Tina Brown‘s Daily Beast venture — to the tune of $18 million. The Beast, while clocking good traffic, is not yet making any money (side note: Brown spoke again of her plans for advertising at last weekend’s BlogHer). He’s also the benefactor of the College Humor gang, they of viral web videos and MTV ascendance — and just announced that he’s backing CH co-founder Ricky Van Veen in the creation of an offshoot production company. But wait, there’s more!

Yesterday news broke that NBCU bad boy chairman Ben Silverman was leaving the company for a new venture with Barry Diller’s IAC. Today, the New York Post is reporting that the venture will be funded by $100 million of Diller’s money.

Only Ben Silverman could parlay a two-year hitless streak as NBC’s chief programmer into a new gig that gives him total control and $100 million in development money. That’s the amount of cash that Barry Diller’s IAC plans to use to seed Silverman’s unnamed new venture, according to two sources with knowledge of the funding plans….Silverman’s new company is a redux of Reveille, the studio he founded and sold to Elisabeth Murdoch’s Shine Group for $120 million, netting Diller, an early Reveille investor, a handsome profit in the process.

And that $100 million could possibly double if Silverman is able to convince those gambling Wall St. types to jump on board. Which means Silverman has a lot of cash on had to do with what he pleases, and Diller is apparently hell-bent on increasing his dominance online, risky though it may be.

So just how deep do Barry Diller’s pockets go? And if they go deeper than this perhaps he should considering sparing a dime or two to the New York Times! And how long can he sustain the high profile ventures — making a profit online is not an easy or quick thing. Or maybe he simply anticipates that we will all be footing part of the bill for him in the not too distant future; just last month he told a conference that pay walls for content were inevitable.

But otherwise, there’s a whole wide web out there for him — just don’t try to get him to pay for Twitter.

Arrington’s first question: Does Barry Diller (#11 in our moguls ranking to Arrington’s #28) know anything about anything, actually? The answer: not really. Because the IAC Chairman has the walnut-sized brain of a sauropod!

As reported by the Wall Street Journal, Wednesday’s Sun Valley panel with Diller and Liberty Media chairman John Malone eventually turned to discussion of Twitter and online monetization:

Despite the hype about Twitter, Diller was pessimistic about Twitter’s prospects for making money, audience members said. Malone said he didn’t think that an advertising model made sense on Twitter, but there was some hope for a subscription model. “Sooner or later people will be willing to pay for these services,” he said.

Sensible, right? We at Mediaite just ran a highly sophisticated, Nate Silver-style linear regression of Twitter’s historical revenues (hint: the year-over-year change from zero to zero is zero!). Without a serious consideration of possible business models, Ev Williams’ baby will wind up with operating income somewhere between the South Sea Company and a lemonade stand.

Arrington, however, responded to the WSJ article with a daddy-issue-fuelled ad hominem (Get it? “Ad” hominem!) attack on Diller and Malone, titled “I am Stunningly Uninterested in Diller and Malone’s Opinion of Twitter“:

In fact, when I read the WSJ article I was reminded of my dad complaining about the music I liked in high school. The music he listened to growing up (probably played on a banjo or something) was infinitely more interesting than all this new stuff. Ah, the old days.

Well, it’s good to know that TechCrunch’s resident Internet Sahib gyrates exclusively to the lastest in neo-Italo disco and post-rock. Except that Arrington’s favorite band, according to his Facebook page, is…U2? Welcome to 2009, Michael. Would you like a Calexico vinyl? Perhaps a Junior Boys cassingle?

The non-Sun-Valley-attending editor goes on:

Diller and Malone both preside over huge companies with a variety of assets. Some of those assets, like Ask.com and Expedia, would even be considered new media or Internet startups. But just like the truly old media guys, Diller and Malone are already dinosaurs in a fast changing world. They have no clue what Twitter is even about. So why in the world would we care what they think about its business model?

Arrington seems to have missed the fact that IAC, far from crumbling before the latest, hippest phalanx of flashy (Flashy?) web properties with social networking functions and integrated iPhone applications, is holding ground even in our current, new media-obliterating recession. Why? Because not everyone online is a TechCrunch-reading, Chrome-installing, Kindle-wielding devotee of technology for technology’s sake — like, say, Michael Arrington.

Let’s consider the evidence: AOL’s Mediaglow is conquering the blogopshere by driving hordes of people to its web properties from AOL.com. Forbes.com generates plenty of traffic by writing “America’s Top 25 Cities for Stucco Facades!” articles, then securing pickup on Yahoo News. As companies like IAC and Liberty Media have discovered, a strategy of catering to the unwashed masses can be – pageview for pageview – just as profitable as squabbling over the self-anointed Internet vanguard exemplified by TechCrunch.

Arrington’s face would likely contort in horror if he saw someone opening a browser with Ask.com as its homepage or spending time customizing their Zwinky; yet IAC’s painfully antiquated Web 1.0 properties have a business model that works – and that doesn’t rely on the Twitter-worshiping web elite.

In conclusion, Michael Arrington should be forced to hold an Expedia server stack on his shoulders until Barry Diller asks him to fetch the Golden Apples of the Twitterides.

Andrew Cedotal is a Contributing Editor at Mediaite. He is also Director of New Media Strategy at Abrams Research. He has had no professional dealings with TechCrunch, Michael Arrington, Barry Diller or neo-Italo gyrations.

Follow Andrew Cedotal on Twitter

Photo by Nikola Tamindzic, via.

Early headlines from the event have focused on the rise of social media (have you heard of Twitter?) as well as paid content. In other words, if you can’t make money off of Twitter or Facebook, how much should one pay for it?

The bears were out in full force, according to Kenneth Li reporting in the Financial Times:

Mr. Murdoch, speaking on the sidelines of the Allen & Co-hosted conference, said he was not interested in buying Twitter, an online service that lets users broadcast short messages that has taken over the web by storm.

“Be careful investing here,” Mr Murdoch warned.

John Malone, chairman of Liberty Media, shared Mr Murdoch’s skepticism. “I don’t know if it’s monetizable,” Mr Malone said of Twitter. He added that someday, users might pay a nominal fee for social media.

Regardless of the real versus potential value of Twitter, we know what everyone’s really concerned with: where everyone ranks on the Power Grid:

Its been reported that the Power Grid’s top three Media Moguls are all in attendance (or at least have plans to be there.) Coming in at number one is News Corp.’s owner Rupert Murdoch, second is Michael Bloomberg (who also runs New York City), and third is Viacom boss Sumner Redstone. That’s a lot of raw power right there.

Rounding out the attendees from our top ten is Facebook magnate Mark Zuckerberg at number eight. And number ten is IAC strongman Barry Diller (though we refer to him around the office as Mr. von Furstenburg.) One wonders how much teasing poor Mel Karmazin has recieved for only placing 19th on the Power Grid Rankings.

TV Titans were also in the house: Disney’s Robert Iger come in at number three, while Time Warner’s Jeff Bewkes is number five. Viacom’s Philippe Dauman is the 19th most powerful TV Titan, which makes us curious if he has to sit in the back row.

Econsultancy.com is reporting that Diller told the crowd at today’s second annual Advertising 2.0 conference that “People will pay for content. They always have…At some point, they are going to say: ‘We have no choice, we have to go behind a pay wall…It will happen. It is absolutely inevitable. There’s no way around it. It’s going to happen. And some people will pay and some people won’t.”

Of course, the question of who will charge first and for what still remains. As reported, it looks like USA Today maybe readying to dip its toe in the heretofore forbidden waters of paid content, however the task of retraining the public to value the journalistic cow after all this time of getting the milk for free, still remains a herculean one.