Pity the poor regulator who, someday soon, will be faced with evaluating some proposed combination of all or parts of Microsoft, Yahoo, AOL and/or News Corp. (is there anyone else left?). What yardstick would you even apply? Someday, they're all going to be in the same combination of the content creation/distribution business, online advertising, applications development and platforms and social networking anyway. It's really only a question of how they get there and when, not whether or even should they. Trying to come to grips with that through the keyhole of any one deal or company is probably not a formula for a coherent regulatory framework for the future of the digital media industry.

Non-affiliated content companies face a similar dilemma in figuring out who to root for in the current speed-dating frenzy over Yahoo. Which of the many combinations being discussed would be most favorable--or at least the least-dangerous--to content owners' interests?

Damned if I know. But the Media Wonk Digital Rule of Thumb probably applies here: The more power in the Google's hands, the worse it is for content owners. YouTube already has a gun to their heads, and Google's current dominance of the online advertising business makes it an unavoidable player in any online monetization model.

It's ultimately incumbent on the media companies to figure out for themselves how to survive and thrive in a YouTube world, of course. But until they do, they might as well root against the future.

UPDATE: Speaking of regulators, House Judiciary Committee chairman John Conyers (D-MI) and ranking member Lamar Smith (R-TX) jointly issued the following statement late Thursday:

Paul Sweeting

Paul Sweeting is the Editor of Content Agenda, a business-to-business brand dedicated to the nexus of content, technology and business. This piece was originally published on Paul's blog "Media Wonk" on Content Agenda and is posted on DMW with the author's permission.

Image By sillydog