From Fox's "Glee" to USA Network's "White Collar," every program this year seems to be doing those unusually long-ish, content-commercial vignettes where a sponsored bit of content interrupts the usual series of 30-second commercials.

How does one buy into a cable network these days? By having some big money -- and a big name, of course. Long gone are the days when big cable companies like Comcast, which had significant equity interest in a cable network, could bang out a slow drumbeat in building cable subscribers from other cable operators around the country. Now the easier, almost necessary, way to gain a foothold is to turn around a struggling or mediocre channel.

After 14 years of calling itself MSNBC.com, the Web site's management wants a name change -- because the political slant of its related TV network doesn't jive with the site's more straight-ahead news service. Good luck trying to rebuild yourself in the next 14 years.

The value of "share" and "search" on the Internet has long been debated. But for traditional TV marketing, such concepts are still relatively new. What will they mean in the new age of Internet-enabled TVs?

The media business is no stranger to legal proceedings. Now some renegade Internet video services are tossing a new wrench into the works, challenging the broadcast networks by running network and local TV programming online -- with essentially not one business agreement with those networks or stations.

More than in previous years, the drumbeat has grown louder for media sellers to consider what extended time-shifted viewing means. Because time-shifting behavior has increased, it's not uncommon for a TV network to say its better performing shows have grown by 30% or 40% or more in program ratings after seven days. According to media agency RPA, the average program minute grew on average 16% after seven days versus its live airing in the 2009-2010 broadcast season.

According to recent research, a third of Internet viewers who watch a typical three- to five-minute video clip on YouTube will depart within 30 seconds after watching. Twenty percent leave within the first 10 seconds. But what about traditional TV? We typically know the drill for a weakening show: If the second half-hour (or 15 minutes) of a show has significantly lower viewership than its corresponding first part, that's bad news. Viewers can be bored with the content. But it doesn't seem that in-program TV erosion of a specific show is speeding up.

Warner Bros. Domestic Television Distribution's effort to turn CNN news star "Anderson Cooper" into the next big daytime syndication talk show host is an interesting play. Here's a personality known for his hard-core news efforts -- especially with his CNN prime-time show "Anderson Cooper 360" -- willing to work in the lighter-topic daytime periods, when the subject matter can range from the guilty-pleasure frivolous to the entertainingly ugly.

Television has always been a drug -- metaphorically speaking. What you probably didn't know was that the modern process of getting TV programs can be equally as addicting, according to Lauren Zalaznick, president, women & lifestyle entertainment networks for NBC Universal. "I think the phrase for the future is that these kids are addicted to choice, right," she said at Media magazine's "Future of Media" event.

One of the more highly touted dramas of the new season, Fox's "Lone Star," is gone after only two episodes. The new drama had dramatically low ratings, most recently registering a low 1.0 area among 18-49 viewers. What happened? Many critics won't be able to tell you why, since many were the show's cheerleaders. Others might say "Lone Star" wasn't a "Fox" show -- that the show didn't speak to the Fox brand.