Last night, the News Hour With Jim Lehrer aired a piece on PBS on “how technology companies are innovating amid the recession by designing popular new smart phone applications.”

BoomTown was asked to reprise my recurring role as a naysayer to tech hyperbole that always comes with the latest trend.

This time it was about how perhaps not all of the 65,000 apps being created by legions of third-party developers for the Apple (AAPL) iPhone–as well as for other smart phone platforms such as Google (GOOG) Android and Palm (PALM) Pre–will result in gold, diamonds and unicorns raining down on innovative entrepreneurs.

Well, except for the iBeer folks!

Oddly enough, I somehow went all Jules Verne at the end and started talking about ubiquitous screens on coffee tables, referencing the movie, “Minority Report” (which I love, despite the ever-annoying Tom Cruise).

So, I am obviously just as bad.

Here’s the video from the News Hour and, if you prefer, here is a link to the transcript:

In addition, here is a lovely clip from “Minority Report,” just because I like to embed stuff and it features that cool interactive mall scene and the USA Today e-newspaper (plus Portuguese subtitles!):

BoomTown is winging it across the country for a Dow Jones event in Chicago–we do our part for the mother ship here at All Things Digital!–so there will not likely be posts today.

That is, unless Yahoo (YHOO) and Microsoft (MSFT) merge, buy Twitter and mount a cavalry attack on the Googleplex (GOOG).

One can dream!

Until Friday then, here are some lovely Chicago-related videos:

Blues Brothers, “Sweet Home Chicago”:

“All That Jazz” from “Chicago”:

What Chicago News Anchors Do During Commercial Breaks:

Tom Cruise Attack on Oprah’s Couch:

Not many online videos have sequels, but the one below–featuring a passel of celebrities, including Tom Cruise, Will Smith, Borat, Leonardo DiCaprio, Julia Roberts, Justin Timberlake, Scarlett Johansson and Harrison Ford–is one and even has famed director Steven Spielberg at the helm.

It is a follow-up to a PSA I posted earlier this month called “Hollywood Declares Themselves,” encouraging young people to vote.

It is from the nonpartisan group Declare Yourself, which has also put out the “Muzzler”/Jessica Alba get-out-the-vote advertising and video.

Declare Yourself is partnering with Google, YouTube and MySpace to distribute the new video, which has been produced by DiCaprio’s Appian Way .

Declare Yourself claims that “since it first debuted on Oct. 1st, the PSA has been viewed over 5,000,000 times. According to all major voting registration sites, including Google, Rock the Vote, and Declare Yourself, over 300,000 new voters registered due to the video alone.”

Here is the new video and also the previous two under it:

Spielberg Directs!

Hollywood Declares Themselves

“Muzzler”/Jessica Alba

After all, Garlinghouse’s infamous “Peanut Butter Manifesto” was the key ur-moment that one could point to as the one in which the curtains were pulled back at the troubled Internet company to reveal, well, a very sticky mess.

Garlinghouse (pictured here), who ran communications and communities for Yahoo (YHOO), is set to be replaced in part by Scott Dietzen, who was the president and CTO of Zimbra (and before that CTO of BEA Systems). Yahoo bought the highly innovative open-source email startup last fall for $350 million.

(By the way, Dietzen will get only 50%–communications products and services–of Garlinghouse’s job, while Front Door head Tapan Bhat will get communities.)

But back to Brad and peanut butter: The 2006 internal document, penned by the Yahoo senior vice president, essentially unfairly impugned delicious peanut butter by using it as a metaphor for Yahoo spreading its resources too thinly.

As far as I am concerned, life is all in the spreading–you can go thick with peanut butter, Brad!

In any case, as a memorial to the Garlinghouse era, BoomTown decodes the manifesto:

Brad wrote: Three and half years ago, I enthusiastically joined Yahoo! The magnitude of the opportunity was only matched by the magnitude of the assets. And an amazing team has been responsible for rebuilding Yahoo!

I proudly bleed purple and yellow everyday! And like so many people here, I love this company.

Translation: This is the borderline cultish kissing-up part, before I deliver the coup de nut.

Thus: Blah, blah, blah–love it! Blah, blah, double blah–so profound I think I shall weep!

And the nuclear blah, blah, blah–I pull out the bleeding purple and yellow expression, used way too often at Yahoo, which, when you really think about it, is just gross.

Brad wrote: But all is not well. Last Thursday’s NY Times article was a blessing in the disguise of a painful public flogging. While it lacked accurate details, its conclusions rang true, and thus was a much needed wake-up call. But also a call to action. A clear statement with which I, and far too many Yahoos, agreed. And thankfully a reminder. A reminder that the measure of any person is not in how many times he or she falls down–but rather the spirit and resolve used to get back up. The same is now true of our Company.

It’s time for us to get back up.

Translation: Cue ominous music! Drag out the “Rocky I-VI” cliches (except for V, which sucked)! Order those I’ve-Fallen- and-I-Can’t- Get-Up thingies for the entire company. Also, insult the media, even though that’s exactly where all Yahoo employees get the most up-to-date information about what’s what here.

Brad wrote: I believe we must embrace our problems and challenges and that we must take decisive action. We have the opportunity–in fact the invitation–to send a strong, clear and powerful message to our shareholders and Wall Street, to our advertisers and our partners, to our employees (both current and future), and to our users. They are all begging for a signal that we recognize and understand our problems, and that we are charting a course for fundamental change. Our current course and speed simply will not get us there. Short-term band-aids will not get us there.

It’s time for us to get back up and seize this invitation.

Translation: You realize, of course, this was written in 2006! Um, almost two years ago. And nothing has, well, changed all that much.

Strong, clear and powerful message that we understand our problems and are charting a course for fundamental change?

A cow could fall through the crack that task disappeared into!

Brad wrote: I imagine there’s much discussion amongst the Company’s senior most leadership around the challenges we face. At the risk of being redundant, I wanted to share my take on our current situation and offer a recommended path forward, an attempt to be part of the solution rather than part of the problem.

Translation: No one in senior management is listening to me. I’ll show them Tom-Cruise- Jerry-Maguire style!

Show me the money!

Brad wrote: Recognizing Our Problems

Translation: Help me, help you. Help me, help you.

Brad wrote: We lack a focused, cohesive vision for our company. We want to do everything and be everything–to everyone. We’ve known this for years, talk about it incessantly, but do nothing to fundamentally address it. We are scared to be left out. We are reactive instead of charting an unwavering course. We are separated into silos that far too frequently don’t talk to each other. And when we do talk, it isn’t to collaborate on a clearly focused strategy, but rather to argue and fight about ownership, strategies and tactics.

Our inclination and proclivity to repeatedly hire leaders from outside the company results in disparate visions of what winning looks like–rather than a leadership team rallying around a single cohesive strategy.

Translation: This, of course, is the description of the basic family setup of “The Sopranos.” Except we have no Bada-Bing.

I so wish we had a Bada-Bing at Yahoo, instead of that not-Google cafeteria.

In fact, I wish we had Tony Soprano running the place, except I personally think he got shot during that annoying “Don’t Stop Believin’” ending (see video below!).

Brad wrote: I’ve heard our strategy described as spreading peanut butter across the myriad opportunities that continue to evolve in the online world. The result: a thin layer of investment spread across everything we do and thus we focus on nothing in particular.

I hate peanut butter. We all should.

Translation: I hate peanut butter. We all should.

That is, those of us whose parents did not know how to make a proper sandwich.

Brad wrote: We lack clarity of ownership and accountability. The most painful manifestation of this is the massive redundancy that exists throughout the organization. We now operate in an organizational structure–admittedly created with the best of intentions–that has become overly bureaucratic. For far too many employees, there is another person with dramatically similar and overlapping responsibilities. This slows us down and burdens the company with unnecessary costs.

Translation: Again, this was two years ago. Plus ca change, plus c’est la meme chose.

That’s French for peanut butter.

Brad wrote: Equally problematic, at what point in the organization does someone really OWN the success of their product or service or feature? Product, marketing, engineering, corporate strategy, financial operations…there are so many people in charge (or believe that they are in charge) that it’s not clear if anyone is in charge. This forces decisions to be pushed up–rather than down. It forces decisions by committee or consensus and discourages the innovators from breaking the mold…thinking outside the box.

There’s a reason why a centerfielder and a left fielder have clear areas of ownership. Pursuing the same ball repeatedly results in either collisions or dropped balls. Knowing that someone else is pursuing the ball and hoping to avoid that collision–we have become timid in our pursuit. Again, the ball drops.

Translation: It is like Al Haig gone wild at Yahoo–I’m in charge here!

And then right onto the business-as-a-baseball game cliche, as we are like “The Bad News Bears” at Yahoo. Except we could use a drunk coach like Walter Matthau right about now.

Brad wrote: We lack decisiveness. Combine a lack of focus with unclear ownership, and the result is that decisions are either not made or are made when it is already too late. Without a clear and focused vision, and without complete clarity of ownership, we lack a macro perspective to guide our decisions and visibility into who should make those decisions. We are repeatedly stymied by challenging and hairy decisions. We are held hostage by our analysis paralysis.

Translation: Yahoo Held Hostage! This is an eerie precursor to CEO Jerry Yang’s 100-day No Sacred Cow Vision Quest, isn’t it?

Brad wrote: We end up with competing (or redundant) initiatives and synergistic opportunities living in the different silos of our company.

• Global strategy from BU vs. Global strategy from Int’l

Translation: There can be only one! Although one is the loneliest number, which is why we have two of everything.

Brad wrote: We have lost our passion to win. Far too many employees are “phoning” it in, lacking the passion and commitment to be a part of the solution. We sit idly by while–at all levels–employees are enabled to “hang around.” Where is the accountability? Moreover, our compensation systems don’t align to our overall success. Weak performers that have been around for years are rewarded. And many of our top performers aren’t adequately recognized for their efforts.

As a result, the employees that we really need to stay (leaders, risk-takers, innovators, passionate) become discouraged and leave. Unfortunately many who opt to stay are not the ones who will lead us through the dramatic change that is needed.

Translation: By “phoning” it in, I mean from their cellphones at home. By “hang around,” I mean at the bar near the office.

By employees that we really need to stay (leaders, risk-takers, innovators, passionate) become discouraged and leave, I mean me! Buh-bye, Ash!

Brad wrote: Solving our Problems

Translation: And now I return to Jerry Maguire!–Help me, help you. Help me, help you.

Brad wrote: We have awesome assets. Nearly every media and communications company is painfully jealous of our position. We have the largest audience, they are highly engaged and our brand is synonymous with the Internet.

I don’t pretend there is only one path forward available to us. However, at a minimum, I want to be part of the solution and thus have outlined a plan here that I believe can work. It is my strong belief that we need to act very quickly or risk going further down a slippery slope. The plan here is not perfect; it is, however, FAR better than no action at all.

Translation: More Maguire required! I will not rest until I have you holding a Coke, wearing your own shoe, playing a Sega game *featuring you*, while singing your own song in a new commercial, *starring you*, broadcast during the Super Bowl, in a game that you are winning, and I will not *sleep* until that happens. I’ll give you 15 minutes to call me back.

Brad wrote: There are three pillars to my plan:

I emphatically believe we simply must eliminate the redundancies we have created and the first step in doing this is by restructuring our organization. We can be more efficient with fewer people and we can get more done, more quickly. We need to return more decision-making to a new set of business units and their leadership. But we can’t achieve this with baby-step changes. We need to fundamentally rethink how we organize to win.

Translation: In a peanutshell, let’s be Google (GOOG).

Brad wrote: Independent of specific proposals of what this reorganization should look like, two key principles must be represented:

Kill the redundancies. Align a set of new BU’s so that they are not competing against each other. Search focuses on search. Social media aligns with community and communications. No competing owners for Video, Photos, etc. And Front Page becomes Switzerland. This will be a delicate exercise–decentralization can create inefficiencies, but I believe we can find the right balance.

Translation: Or, maybe we could be Facebook.

Brad wrote: I love Yahoo! I’m proud to admit that I bleed purple and yellow. I’m proud to admit that I shaved a Y in the back of my head.

Translation: More yucky purple and yellow bleeding with a cup full of Britney-Spears-crazy hairstyling on top!

Brad wrote: My motivation for this memo is the adamant belief that, as before, we have a tremendous opportunity ahead. I don’t pretend that I have the only available answers, but we need to get the discussion going; change is needed and it is needed soon. We can be a stronger and faster company–a company with a clearer vision and clearer ownership and clearer accountability.

Catch the balls.

Translation: My motivation for this memo is the adamant belief that it will drive my bosses nuts and someone will surely leak it to the press.

Thus, I wind up with the marathon-not-a-sprint cliche, sprinkle in the get-up one and round the bases with the baseball cliche.

Brad wrote: And stop eating peanut butter.

Translation: Despite my unfair impugning of the peanut-loving work of George Washington Carver, I secretly love peanut butter.

But it once got in my chocolate. Or did my chocolate get in my peanut butter?

In any case, soon to come: The Jelly Memo. That’ll be sweet!

And here is the last minutes of “The Sopranos,” where Tony–and here is an exhaustive and convincing explanation as to why–got whacked:

In yet another letter to Yahoo Chairman Roy Bostock, the ever-grumpier billionaire investor, who is waging a proxy fight against Yahoo (YHOO) and seeking to oust Yang and crew, stepped up the volume to Crazy Eddie levels today.

It’s almost too juicy to require translation, as the veins practically pop out in Icahn’s letter from all the agita he seems to be experiencing over this botched takeover.

Icahn writes: Dear Mr. Bostock:

I have constantly complained about how far CEOs and boards will go in order to retain their jobs, yet even I am amazed at the length Jerry Yang and the Yahoo board have gone to in order to entrench their positions and keep shareholders from deciding if they wished to sell to Microsoft.

Translation: And I thought Dick Parsons of Time Warner (TWX) was a potted plant! But you guys make him look like the Road Runner, which is a very nice Warner Bros. brand, I might add.

Icahn wrote: According to details in a complaint that I became aware of yesterday (details Yahoo fought to keep under seal), Jerry Yang and a majority of the board went to inordinate lengths to sabotage a Microsoft bid.

The damage to Microsoft “is compounded by the fact that Yahoo’s thousands of engineers, known as ‘Technical Yahoos!,’ have detailed job responsibilities and qualifications.”

Translation: I am playing brain dead here, even though everyone and their grandmother knew exactly what Yang was doing at the time with that massive and costly severance plan.

But, with a little verbal foot-stamping and some grumbly sounds, I think it approximates an appropriately hysterical level of outrage and surprise.

Icahn wrote: Most importantly, Microsoft might never be able to trust a CEO and board who, while claiming to be negotiating in good faith, went behind their back and adopted a “plan,” which not only sabotages any Microsoft acquisition but went so far as to completely disable its own ability to rescind the “plan” as long as Microsoft’s offer remains pending.

In my opinion, it will be extremely difficult for Microsoft or other companies to trust, work with and negotiate with a company that would go to these lengths.

Translation: Outrage! Foot-stamping! Grumbling! Acting like the once-thuggish Microsoft (MSFT) doesn’t actually admire this tactic by Yahoo in its secret heart of hearts.

And now, the piece de resistance, I compare Yang to Ernst Stavro Blofeld, as translated by Mike Myers’ Dr. Evil (One millllllliiiiioooooon dollars!).

What next from you evil-doers? A shark with a nuclear bomb attached in my lap pool? Painting me all gold and purple? Perhaps suspending me and a lovely disposable Bond girl high above a tank of piranhas?

But I am 0000000007, a billionaire’s secret agent number, so bring it on!

Icahn wrote: It is insulting to shareholders that Yahoo for the last month has told us that they are quite willing to negotiate a sale of the company to Microsoft and cannot understand why Microsoft has walked away.

Could this have been the problem?

Translation: I like the silly focus on “the plan,” don’t you? It sounds so sneaky and naughty.

Even though, truth be told, Microsoft’s Steve Ballmer has publicly pointed to the ad outsourcing deal with its archrival Google (GOOG) that Yahoo is considering, as well as the price it is willing to pay, as the software giant’s main deal blockers.

Icahn writes: Even more deceitful are Yahoo’s actions toward its own employees, for whom you claimed to have set up the “plan.”

Management neglected to mention to these same employees that Microsoft in its proposals had earmarked $1.5 billion of retention incentives (representing over $100,000 per employee) meant to allay any employee concerns.

Translation: Again, “The Plan” sounds spooky, doesn’t it? M. Night Shyamalan is set to make a movie of it, just like “The Sixth Sense.” The tag line: “I see overcompensated geeks!”

Icahn wrote: Ironically, according to the complaint, this is not the first time that Yahoo has denied shareholders the opportunity of selling to Microsoft at a large premium.

An article in CNET News cited in the complaint sums it up by stating, “Yahoo may indeed agree to Microsoft’s [offer], but it will be over Jerry Yang’s dead body.”

Translation: Dead bodies! I smell a hit movie! Hello, Oscar!

I wonder if Michael Douglas should play me again?

Greed, by the way: Still good!

Wait, I am being distracted from the issue at hand, which is: Was the board and former CEO Terry Semel high not to accept that $40 a share last year?

Smoking, I might add, is very bad for your health.

Icahn wrote: I and many of your shareholders believe that the only way to salvage Yahoo in the long, if not short run, is to merge with Microsoft. However, because of HSR considerations, to complete a merger of this magnitude will take a period of time.

Therefore, the best chance to bring Microsoft and Yahoo together is to replace Yang and the current Yahoo board with a board that will negotiate in good faith with Microsoft and in whom Microsoft will have trust to operate the company during the long period between signing and closing.

Translation: Please step down now! No? Pretty please? (It was worth the try.)

Of course, Microsoft trusts me less than you to run the place, but let’s leave that pertinent point aside here, shall we?

Icahn wrote: You stated in a press release yesterday that, “Yahoo’s board of directors, including Jerry Yang, has been crystal clear that it would consider any proposal by Microsoft that was in the best interests of its shareholders.”

I understand how these actions are in the best interests of management and a board whose members each receive $40,000 per month for several days work, but it is hard for me to understand how these actions are in the “best interests of the shareholders.”

Translation: To make my point, let me channel Jack Nicholson in “A Few Good Men” here, with me playing Jack and Yang Tom Cruise:

Icahn: Ever served in a forward area?

Yang: No sir.

Icahn: Ever put your life in another man’s hands, ask him to put his life in yours?

Yang: No sir.

Icahn: We follow orders, son. We follow orders or people die. It’s that simple. Are we clear?

Yang: Yes sir.

Icahn: Are we clear?

Yang: Crystal.

Icahn wrote: However, despite your actions to date, there is still some possibility that you can resuscitate a Microsoft offer for the company.

I can only hope that you will finally do what is in the “best interests of the shareholders.”

Translation: My “plan” is to say “the plan” as much as possible, until I drive everyone nuts and take their eye off the ball, which is getting more money for me in this digital briar patch, as the only “shareholder” that I actually care about.

I threw in the “one doesn’t have to be a rocket scientist” dig, because I am not one in any way whatsoever and still have my secretary print out my emails.

By the way, what is this Facebook thingamajig people keep talking about as another Microsoft target? Do you have to be a rocket scientist to join it?

Icahn wrote: Sincerely yours,

CARL C. ICAHN

Translation: Still as insincere as ever!

Today, it is this gem from online video comedy site Funny or Die, in which Jerry O’Connell (who knew he was so hilarious?) does a mean and spot-on imitation of the recent wacky video and Web phenomena of Tom Cruise espousing the virtues and power of Scientology.

Along with the maniacal laughing, the best line: “For me, it’s all about KFC. It’s just good chicken. Poof.”

This is exactly the kind of content the Web is perfect for.

Here’s the spoof:

Also, here is a link to an interview that I recently did with Funny or Die investor Mark Kvamme of Sequoia Capital.