As former Disney CEO and online video investor Michael Eisner said in a recent onstage Q&A appearance about what works for video on the Web: “Sex seems to work. User-generated, sports, news, anything with Sarah Palin works.”

Indeed, anything with Sarah Palin.

Besides the huge amount of spoof humor videos that have popped up everywhere, both professional and amateur, as well as the explosive number of viewings of online videos of Tina Fey impersonating the Republican vice presidential candidate and Alaska governor.

Here is the latest Internet effort, an unusual interactive site called PalinAsPresident in which you click on various items in the Oval Office, where Palin is sitting behind the desk, to hear funny remarks from her.

Click on a globe and you hear “SomethingStan.” Click on a poster for the film, “Maverick,” and you hear, naturally, “maverick.” Of course, there is a pit bull wearing lipstick inside the desk.

Keep clicking on the door and you get three different images. But don’t click on the deer the third time–trust me, it is much worse than the fate that befell Bambi’s mom.

Also, don’t click the red phone twice, or it’s curtains for us all. As the spoof Palin says: “Uh-oh!”

Called “The Comeback Id” (oh, how pun-ny!), the article has gotten a lot of attention for pointing out the rampant speculation that Clinton’s well-known penchant for marital infidelity had returned.

And the reason for that disturbing development, besides Clinton himself? The piece actually placed a good bit of the blame on Clinton’s close friend, grocery magnate and billionaire Ron Burkle (pictured here), who also has been one of the key directors at Yahoo (YHOO) in its takeover fight with Microsoft (MSFT).

It’s a wonder Burkle can focus on the turmoil at Yahoo, given how busy he appears to be in the article corrupting Clinton both personally and–worse–professionally, via some questionable investments the pair had made through Burkle’s Yucaipa Companies.

Writer Todd Purdum paints a decidedly unattractive picture of Burkle, noting even the tasteless nickname of Burkle’s plane these days, in a portrayal so rough that Yahoo CEO Jerry Yang’s tough treatment by the press recently looks like a walk in the park.

Well, almost.

In what amounts to a rant by Carl Icahn (pictured here), The Wall Street Journal gives the billionaire investor lots of room to kvetch about what he thinks of Yang, including asserting that he will oust the Yahoo founder if he wins his proxy fight against the company.

“I am amazed at the lengths that Jerry Yang and the board went to entrench themselves in this situation,” said Icahn.

Apparently, Icahn was the only one who didn’t get the memo that Yahoo has been consistently obstreperous about Microsoft’s many overtures, since–well, let’s do the exact calculations–forever. And a day.

Still, Icahn perseveres and hangs this old entrenched management chestnut on a lawsuit that was recently filed by shareholders that points to the massive and costly severance plan Yahoo sneakily put into place as a ploy to fend off Microsoft.

“It’s no longer a mystery to me why Microsoft’s offer isn’t around,” Icahn said. “How can Yahoo keep saying they’re willing to negotiate and sell the company on the one hand, while at the same time they’re completely sabotaging the process without telling anyone.”

How? By Yang opening his mouth, that’s how, and then doing nothing much.

As a student of this lugubrious style of Olympic dithering, I would point Icahn to Yang’s 100-day Sacred Cow VisionQuest, well before this soap opera got started.

You need to catch up pronto, Carl!

And speaking of people irked by Yang of late, investor Gordon Crawford (pictured here) also made some news yesterday with his investment in Veoh Networks, part of a $30 million round that included Intel Capital and Adobe Systems (ADBE).

Existing investors in the not-YouTube video service–Shelter Capital, Spark Capital, Goldman Sachs (GS), Michael Eisner’s Tornante Company, Time Warner Investments (TWX) and Jonathan Dolgen–also ponied up more money.

Crawford, the SVP of Capital Research Global Investors, manages a massive portfolio, and it is one of Yahoo’s biggest shareholders.

And, unlike Veoh, Yahoo is an investment Crawford has not been happy with recently.

“I am extremely angry at Jerry Yang and at the so-called independent board,” he said in an interview a month ago. “I’m hoping that there is such an outpouring of outrage that the board is embarrassed into revisiting this thing, but I’m not optimistic about that.”

And by independent board, by the way, he meant directors like–you guessed it–Ron Burkle!

At least Burkle’s not to blame for the so-so, lots-and-lots-missing–Google? What Google? (GOOG)–piece in the same Vanity Fair issue, an oral history of the Internet.

Called “How the Web Was Won,” it makes the founding of the world’s most important medium seem awfully dull.

I’d recommend instead–as any sentient being would–the cover story on Angelina Jolie, with this sharp quote from her: “In my father’s generation, the product was 80% of what you were putting into the world, and your personal life was 20%. It now seems that 80% of the product I put out is silly, made-up stories and what I’m wearing.”

Or not wearing, in the case of the pictures of Jolie in this article.

The one-time mighty conference has obviously lagged, as the way the entertainment industry buys and sells programming has drastically changed over the years.

Also a concern: the impact of interactive technologies–digital issues seemed to be the biggest topic for attendees.

I was there, for example, for a panel–called “Possibilities and Perils of Internet TV”–about online video with Walt Disney head Michael Eisner (pictured here), former Viacom head Jonathan Dolgen and Dmitry Shapiro, founder and CIO of Veoh.

Both Eisner and Dolgen are investors in Veoh–one of the many online video services out there. And Eisner has been dabbling in the new-media content space with several efforts at original programming.

The conversation was lively, with Eisner bullish that the online video market would explode in the coming years, both in terms of influence and profitability.

He compared the situation to the early days of cable television and also noted that it would take a new generation of talent to make it happen at lower costs.

And Eisner quite correctly noted that a lot of the new stuff that is being produced for the Web from Hollywood is simply weak material that failed to get on television.

But he did point to all sorts of interesting experimentation going on, and said he was convinced that advertisers would eventually follow.

Both he and also Dolgen expected the advent of better editorial control and programming efforts would increase audience.

I was less sanguine, in my ongoing role as official grump of the Web, wondering how overblown production costs and this-is-the-way-we-do-it stubbornness in Hollywood would change.

More importantly, I am still waiting for better answers on how really serious money will be made in the medium.

In any case, here is a short video I made, with interviews with Shapiro and Dolgen. Of course, Mr. Online Video, Eisner, declined to be interviewed by me and my little annoying Flip camera:

I am back in Sin City to appear on a panel at the National Association of Television Program Executives (NATPE) conference here today, along with former Walt Disney head Michael Eisner, former Viacom head Jonathan Dolgen and Dmitry Shapiro, founder and CIO of Veoh.

Titled “Possibilities and Perils of Internet TV,” it should be an interesting discussion, since I think it is all peril at this point with very little to show in the possibility column.

While there have been a lot of attempts to create Internet TV–and by this I don’t mean delivering traditional television via IP–most of what is out there is repurposed professional content that Hollywood hopes we will think is newfangled and, via easy-to-post user-generated material, a more massive version of “America’s Funniest Home Videos.”

In other words, bad Web programs and a whole lot of videos of cats on skateboards. As for profits from all this: Not so much.

Nonetheless, the television industry is changing dramatically. With the backdrop of the writers’ strike, the situation is even more volatile, as viewers migrate away from the network model and toward, well, who knows?

Both Eisner and Dolgen are investors in Veoh–one of the many online video services out there, this one aimed at professional content. And Eisner has been dabbling in the new media content space to mixed results.

I wrote about Eisner back in November when he jumped on the Blame-Steve-Jobs bandwagon, saying Apple was to blame for Hollywood’s woes.

Said Eisner–whose tense relationship with Jobs was well known–then: “[Movie and television studios] make deals with Steve Jobs, who takes them to the cleaners. They make all these kinds of things, and who’s making money? Apple! They should get a piece of Apple. If I was a union, I’d be striking up wherever he is.”

I will be sure to ask him about that comment.

We did not think it could get worse than NBC honcho Jeff Zucker (pictured here), who demanded a vig for every iPod sold because “Apple sold millions of dollars worth of hardware off the back of our content and made a lot of money.”

And then came former Disney pooh-bah Michael Eisner, who blamed the writers’ strike on Apple head Steve Jobs, because he was ruining the entertainment business with that darn iPod.

“[Movie and television studios] make deals with Steve Jobs, who takes them to the cleaners. They make all these kinds of things, and who’s making money? Apple! They should get a piece of Apple,” said Eisner. “If I was a union, I’d be striking up wherever he is.”

And now comes Morris, who heads up the Universal Music Group and who was interviewed by Seth Mnookin of Wired, trying again to skewer Jobs.

Of course, he ends up poking his own petard. From his private dining room (I kid you not) at the company HQ, the 68-year-old veteran music exec talked about plans to take aim at Apple’s popular music player and service, blamed college students for the music industry’s troubles and generally sounded like a woefully out-of-touch exec.

Says Morris in a refrain you would think he might have gotten over after all this time and all those stolen songs ago: “Is it correct that people share their music, fill up these devices with music they haven’t paid for? If you had Coca-Cola coming through the faucet in your kitchen, how much would you be willing to pay for Coca-Cola? There you go.”

We know, we know, there you go. Piracy is wrong! We agree! Of course, that begs a solution.

And Morris’s have not been so very consistent. On one hand, he’s pissed and, thus, has aggressively gone after companies like YouTube and MySpace for copyright infringement and has held up Microsoft by taking a piece of Zune sales. On the other, Universal has offered some unprotected songs on sites like Amazon and has been doing well in the ringtone business.

Still, Morris seems proud of coming off as an anti-geek, a stance that has apparently messed up the good thing the music business had going–mostly milking consumers and not delivering product in the way they wanted it.

“There’s no one in the record company that’s a technologist. That’s a misconception writers make all the time, that the record industry missed this. They didn’t. They just didn’t know what to do,” said Morris, without a trace of regret about the rank incompetence of dealing with the changes created by digital distribution. “It’s like if you were suddenly asked to operate on your dog to remove his kidney. What would you do?”

Mnookin correctly suggests getting a vet. But I would go a step further: Get a new dog.

Instead, he is kicking a few others, such as Jobs, mostly for out-negotiating the labels to get them to sell on iTunes. “We were just grateful that someone was selling online,” said Morris. “The problem is, he became a gatekeeper. We make a lot of money from him, and suddenly you’re wearing golden handcuffs. We would hate to give up that income.”

Which is why he and others are trying to blow up the whole thing, by attempting to do damage to iTunes by pulling songs off the service (evil to consumers who love the iPod, but it could work) and offering alternatives like a competing subscription music service that seems destined for failure too.

Worst of all, Morris incorrectly compares the music industry to the Shmoo of the cartoon Li’l Abner, as if the creature was a loser. In fact, the Shmoo is beloved and helpful to all, as well as delicious and entertaining, characteristics the music industry could take a clue from.

“Shmoos haint make believe,” said Li’l Abner. “The hull (whole) earth is one.”

Morris should wish he were a Schmoo.

What, oh what, can we say about the latest inane quote from yet another Hollywood mogul about Apple’s Steve Jobs and his hugely popular iTunes and iPod products.

The latest piece of hoo-ha comes from former Disney CEO Michael Eisner (pictured below), pointing a finger at Apple as the real villain in the ongoing strike between the Writers Guild of America and Hollywood entertainment behemoths

At fault? Steve Jobs, of course!

Of course, it has been those greedy studio execs who have been shafting creators of content for decades now, by giving them a minuscule cut of revenues from DVDs and video cassettes.

Now that they are trying to do the same with income they will be getting as content moves to digital media, including the Web, cell phones and other new devices, Eisner comes out with an appalling analysis in an interview yesterday at the Media and Money conference.

Said Eisner:

“[Movie and television studios] make deals with Steve Jobs, who takes them to the cleaners. They make all these kinds of things, and who’s making money? Apple! They should get a piece of Apple. If I was a union, I’d be striking up wherever he is.”

Oh my goodness, considering how many businesses hang off the entertainment industry. Should the writers get revenues from the sales of television sets? Popcorn sold at the movies? From TV Guide? Of course not.

This comes after NBC Universal CEO Jeff Zucker noted in another interview recently that Apple owed him some money too for its success with the iPod.

“We don’t want to replace the dollars we were making in the analog world with pennies on the digital side,” said Zucker, who suggested entertainment companies should get a piece of the action. “Apple sold millions of dollars worth of hardware off the back of our content and made a lot of money.”

As I noted then: “That’s sort of like Britney Spears asking the tabloids to hand over a big bag of Benjamins for making such bank covering her riveting high jinks and crotch emergencies. Frankly, she has a better argument than Zucker.”

Eisner is even worse, making the score thus far: Britney 2, Hollywood 0.