According to Advertising Age, as soon as Oprah mentioned the Kindle on her October 24th Oprah's Book Club, Google searches on the term went up fivefold. Traffic directed to Amazon from Oprah.com went through the roof (15,000%) and the aggregate of all visits to Amazon were bumped up 6%, an enormous spike in a mature site. Given these numbers, her Kindle endorsement is a home run for the platform, and should drive huge Christmas sales.

Since Amazon spiffs referring sites 10% of the sale price, Oprah.com stands to rake in over $35 per Kindle sale. And, of course, this establishes the platform as a fulfillment alternative for each subsequent Oprah's book recommendation. Ka-ching!

According to Wikipedia, publishers believe Oprah has 20 to 100 times the sway of any other public figure in driving book sales. For example, a recent announcement that she selected The Story of Edgar Sawtelle by David Wroblewski inspired the publisher to order a run of 750,000 copies. Each one carrying the Oprah selection tag was given its own ISBN to track her impact.

Also read:

Amazon vies for schoolbook market with Kindle

Amazon builds appealing list of Kindle titles

At a mere $276 million, celebrity talk-show host and entertainment billionaire Oprah Winfrey could afford to buy Bear Stearns (NYSE: BSC), which closed Tuesday at $5.91 per share and keeps on climbing to over $6.50 a share in morning trading. The story alone and the associated publicity would be worth at least that. Furthermore, she could at least make an offer and demand a meeting with the Federal Reserve Board to discuss the issue.

If her offer was rejected, she would still be able to generate millions of dollars of publicity and perhaps she might want to acquire the asset, in particular if the Fed is going to protect the acquirer from potential losses. She could really become an international mogul, the likes of which has not been seen. We all know that Oprah wants to do good. She is so giving, this could be the ultimate.

I could just see the headlines: Oprah Winfrey takes on JP Morgan Chase (NYSE: JPM) and the Federal Reserve to rescue John Q. Public.

If Oprah Winfrey can cast a spell that turns thousands of housewives into literature critics and transformed underdog Barack Obama into the possible Democratic nominee for president, getting her followers to embrace an esoteric New Age philosophy should be a snap. Her latest endeavor, though, is going to need more bandwidth.

The talk show queen is getting into the business of enlightenment, offering a 10-week Web seminar with self-help guru Eckhart Tolle, author of "A New Earth," an amalgam of Buddhist, Christian and Islamic influences, according to USA Today. The book also happens to be the latest pick of Oprah's Book Club.

Last night's first webcast was one of the largest events in the history of the internet, attracting more than 500,000 people. "Unfortunately, some of our users experienced delays in viewing the webcast," according to a statement from Oprah's Harpo Productions. "We are working to identify the specific causes for the problems experienced and will work diligently to rectify them."

Seekers of enlightenment be forewarned, the path outlined by "A New Earth" isn't an easy one.

Since the announcement on Oprah's television program that Suze Orman's financial advice book Money & Women would be available for free as an e-book from Oprah.com, more than a million copies in English have been downloaded, as well as an additional 19,000 in Spanish, according to a statement released Saturday. This puts it the same league as such other free download sensations as the 9-11 Commission Report and Stephen King's "Riding the Bullet."

Yet, the offer hasn't kept people from buying the version of Money & Women published by a division of Random House last year. The book was ranked number 6 on Amazon on Saturday, behind Oprah Book Club selection A New Earth and just ahead of Barack Obama's The Audacity of Hope. The 9-11 Commission Report remained a bestseller for months despite its availability for free online.

The big publishers remain skeptical about providing content for free online. While some see it as a valuable marketing tool, others suspect that it harms sales of traditional books. But the tide may be turning, albeit in baby steps. HarperCollins has announced plans to make available free electronic versions of some of its books, or portions thereof, the New York Times reported last week. They will not be downloadable, however.

Providing some free content is "like taking the shrink wrap off a book," said a spokesperson for HarperCollins, which will allow consumers to sample the content. "I didn't grow up buying every book I read," added fantasy novelist Neil Gaiman, author of some of the free content. "I read books at libraries, I read books at friend's houses, I read books that I found on people's window sills."

Suze Orman suggests that sales are a secondary concern for her in the Oprah offer. "This was not about getting people to buy the book, but getting them to read it, and that was the intention behind this offer."

This post was part of AOL Money & Finance's Best & Worst of 2007 feature. Voting has now closed and readers have chosen Oprah Winfrey as the most overpaid celebrity of the year. Be sure to let us know in the comments if you are pleased with this result.

Oprah Winfrey returns to our Most Overpaid Celebrity category after having lost the title to Paris Hilton last year. For 2007 she is joined by overpaid celebrities Madonna, George Lopez, and Russell Crowe.

Winfrey, Madonna, and Lopez all made the Forbes Celebrity 100, a ranking of Hollywood players by pay, influence, and popularity. Winfrey, of course, comes in at number one, both in terms of pay and power. Madonna's earnings placed her at number nine on the list, while Lopez came in at number fifty-one.

Forbes estimates Winfrey's earnings at $260 million last year, and her net worth in the area of $1.5 billion, making her the nation's wealthiest African American. She'll be adding two new reality shows to her media empire, which already includes a blockbuster daytime talk show, satellite radio show, magazine, and Broadway musical, as well as stakes in hit shows by Dr. Phil McGraw and Rachael Ray. The school for girls she founded in South Africa has drawn much media attention this year, and she's recently endorsed Barack Obama's presidential campaign. Winfrey has been called the world's most powerful woman, the most influential woman in the world, one of the most influential persons of the 20th century, the world's first black woman billionaire, and the greatest pop culture icon of all time. Can any mortal person live up to all that hype?

Call it "Girls Gone Mild." In 2000, Geraldine Laybourne, the former president of the Nickelodeon network for children, and Oprah Winfrey, who needs no introduction, got together to launch a media empire focused on women -- called Oxygen. The idea was to create synergies between TV and the internet. Microsoft Corp. (NASDAQ: MSFT) founder Paul Allen liked the idea enough he helped back the venture.

But the dreams never matched the reality. The sexiness of the idea -- a woman's media empire! -- never lived up to its potential. And today, NBC, a unit of General Electric (NYSE: GE), announced that it would buy Oxygen Media for $925 million.

This post is part of our Money Face-Offs feature. Let us know who you think comes out ahead in this head-to-head match-up, and check out our other Money Face-Off posts.

Celebrities -- they're more than superior human beings, they're money-making machines. If these celebrities were stocks, which would be the shrewd buy?

One sure sign of celebrity is first-name recognition, and today's contestants have certainly reached that pinnacle. Oprah and Martha are brands known worldwide, Oprah for compassion and wisdom, Martha for style and elegance.

Martha Stewart's brand is still tainted by her 2004 insider trading conviction and her stretch in Camp Cupcake. Before then, her growth from model and stockbroker to America's favorite lifestyle celebrity was impressive. After authoring the bestselling book Entertaining in 1979, she transitioned to television with her hit show Martha Stewart Living, for which she gathered several Emmys. In 1987, she inked a lucrative deal with déclassé retailer Kmart as a lifestyle consultant, to help it break into higher price-point retailing. In 1990, with Time Warner (NYSE:TWX) she launched Martha Stewart Living Magazine. The zenith of her career came in 1997 when she took herself public. The IPO for Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia (NYSE: MSO) made her a billionaire.

Just in time for Mother's Day, direct marketers have swamped my mailbox.

In the last week or so junk mail targeting Mom has piled up. There's a Costco Wholesale Corp.'s (NASDAQ: COST) magazine with a story titled Mom Inc. on the cover. Tiffany & Co. (NYSE: TIF) is selling some lovely trinkets between baby blue covers. 1-800-flowers.com, Inc.(NASDAQ: FLWS) has a catalog full of roses, chocolate and other things that "Mom wants." The local taxidermist even sent me a coupon for a deal on moose stuffing (this is Alaska) for the special day.

Is it my imagination or has the amount of junk mail increased?

It's up. In 2006 companies sent more than 114 billion direct -mail pieces. That's about 15% more than five years earlier, according to the United States Postal Service. The Postal Service and I don't see eye to eye when it comes to credit card offers, coupons and bulky catalogs. The federal agency loves direct mailers because they generate big bucks for the service. It even has a magazine, Deliver, whose mission is to help direct mailers find faster, better ways to my mailbox, and wallet. In 2006, for the first time ever, the volume of bulk mail, which is another name for direct mail, exceeded all first class.

But there is a fledging company taking on the Postal Service and the giants of direct marketing. Hollywood celebrity Matt Damon sits on its board Greendimes.com will take your name off direct mail lists, unwanted credit card solicitations, and the dozens or hundreds of catalogs that arrive yearly. It will keep tabs on direct marketers to keep you off the lists and even plant a tree for you every month, but not on your property. The cost: $36 a year.

Sounds like a good gift for Mom. It's a lot less than diamonds from Tiffany's. Or a stuffed moose.

Senator Barack Obama received a huge endorsement to his campaign last week from Oprah Winfrey. If you question the power of her endorsement, I would point out that she recently convinced millions of Americans to read As I Lay Dying by William Faulkner. Only parting the Red Sea would have been a greater miracle.

The advantages to Obama of having Oprah on his side are wide-ranging, and start with the good will his brand gains by its association with hers. In a recent Celebrity Trust Index compiled by Davie-Brown Talent, Oprah and Tom Hanks were named as the most trustworthy celebrities. And the most trend-setting? Oprah, again. To people impressed with wealth, her $1.3 billion will speak volumes.

Add this extraordinary good will to her market penetration, and Obama couldn't ask for a better supporter. Oprah is best known for her daily talk show, but she also hosts the daily Oprah & Friends radio show on XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc. (NASDAQ: XMSR), publishes O, the Oprah Magazine, and works the Internet through Oprah.com.

Her presence should benefit Obama several ways. It will certainly help with fund raising, both from Oprah's audience and those bandwagon riders who see her endorsement as legitimizing his prospects.

Obama has, surprisingly, received lukewarm support from the African-American community, and this endorsement should elevate his stature in that demographic. Traditionally, Democrats benefit from large vote turnout, and he could benefit if Oprah uses her bully pulpit to inspire a strong get-out-the-vote movement.

Best of all, by announcing for Obama, Oprah has eliminated Obama's greatest threat as a potential candidate: Oprah herself. What a candidate she would be!

I have been clicking along through Forbes' "Billionaire Women We Envy" list and finding very little to which I related. Sure, Oprah's on my list, but not because she's a billionaire so much. And I started thinking... what is it, really, that I envy? Because envy is far, far from admiration. It's a whole other category. Who do I envy, and why?

When I saw the headline, before I even clicked further, I thought "Maria Bartiromo." She doesn't even make Forbes' cutoff -- she's not a billionaire, for starters. But if there's anyone I envy, it's Maria, she of the smoky eyes and the men in powerful places who do stupid, stupid things for her.

What do women envy of other women? It's not their money, at least, not for me. It's their power, their fame, their ability to juggle family and career. And most of all it's their ability to manipulate others without seeming manipulative at all. It's the Money Honey, able to move markets with a bat of her dark eyelashes.

If I was to create a list of the women most worthy of a female MBA's envy, here's who would be on it:

This post is written as part of AOL Money & Finance's Best & Worst 2006. You can vote for Donald Trump's hair as the Worst Signature Style.

Good Mr. Trump, he of the fluffy comb-over, had a heck of a year in 2006. We should all be so lucky (he would ascribe luck to none of it, of course, but that is another matter)!

Just a few of his accomplishments:

• The Iconic Donald saw his net worth rise again above a mere five billion dollars.
• He is erecting buildings all over the world, including a Trump Tower in Dubai. The Hair is literally global.
• He married a stunning model, half his age, and fathered a lovely son whom he subtly named Baron. He has stated for the record that he does not and will not change the baby's diapers.
• His television show, The Apprentice, is literally one of the top-rated shows in television. To demonstrate that his Trumpian blood line lives on, he fired his firm professionals from the show and put both of his genetically perfect children on camera alongside him. And they are articulate and on the ball, like pop.
• To put a capper on his TV dominance he put a smack down on his "friend" and Apprentice ingénue, Martha Stewart, when she attempted her own show and talked down the D-man. Nobody does that! Wonder how he handles his enemies when they cross him?

And now, at year end, he is giving foreign-policy style speeches and musing about running for president. And like our current president, the Donald does not drink alcohol. No wonder he is always so crisp.

I wondered on Wednesday about Oprah's so-called "Pay it Forward" show, where she gave audience members $1000 debit cards, loaned them video cameras, and told them to go out and do good works in a much-ballyhoed replacement for her "favorite things" holiday show. So charitable, I thought.

And then the comments started coming.

Audience members were asked to come back for the wrap-up show at their own expense. And they did, expecting (it seems) that their difficult journeys of giving back would be featured. Everybody loves a little fame, or at least thanks, for their efforts. And, let's face it, if Oprah asked you to film something you'd done, and then come back to the show, wouldn't you come? Of course you would.

Except that, once back in the studio audience, only a very few of the audience members' stories were told. The audience was also informed they couldn't keep the video cameras -- the tax burden would be too much (despite, as some commenters mentioned, the fact that the expense to return to Chicago for the taping was many times greater than any tax burden). Those who wrote in weren't so upset that their exploits went unwatched (despite the fact that they'd worked very hard to execute and record the tale of their response to Oprah's challenge) -- they were more hurt that the producers asked them all back without mentioning which clips would be shown. As Connie Miller said, "When the producers called the audience to return they should have informed them that their particular stories were not going to be highlighted so they could choose to get a pat on the back from Oprah from home and not pay additional funds to come back."

The final injury? When the audience members were in the waiting room, the producers played reels of past "Favorite Things" shows, so the charitable and entirely gift-free viewers could see the delight as audience members of years past discovered free gift ... after free gift ... after free gift.

Sheesh. At least give them a pashmina shawl, Oprah!

Oprah, Oprah, Oprah. We've always relied on you as the doyenne of spendy gifts, the queen of conspicious consumption. It was you, every year, who announced your "favorites" with much fanfare and fabulous giveaways to your adoring audience (and who wouldn't adore you, with your sponsorship-fueled generosity?).

But this year, you've betrayed the capitalist in us all. You've really gone and done it this time. You've told us to give to charities, not buy things. Huh?

Oh, sure, I'm all for philathropy. But I don't expect this of Oprah. Consumers everywhere are relying on her for her wisdom in selecting the must-have gifts for the holiday. Small, artsy and luxe companies rely on her (or fear her, as the case may be) to send stacks and gigabytes of orders their way, with a "must-deliver" date of December 24th.

Not this year. This year, you're supposed to use your spare cash (and the $1000 debit card, if you were in her audience during the October taping of Oprah's "Pay it Forward" show) to do good works.

I'm all for charity, but I don't see it as a replacement for giving things. I may sometimes interpret the "things" in a different way than Oprah ever did, choosing to give hand-made gifts, books, photographs, scores from the thrift stores, and other slightly less conspicuous examples of consumption. But holiday shopping is inviolate ... I'll wait 'til December 30th or so and then get into the selflessly charitable spirit. Will you follow Oprah's lead, or stick with the pretty-and-tangible things this holiday season?

Via Orbitcast found this extensive ongoing study of the satellite radio wars that Bridge Ratings is conducting. The study is updated on their site weekly, more or less. Its purpose is to "analyze consumer preferences related to satellite service brand and satellite radio in general." Lots of data to mine for chart, graph and stats junkies. The study compares brands XM Satellite Radio Holdings Inc. (NASDAQ: XMSR) and Sirius Satellite Radio Inc. (NASDAQ: SIRI). Right now the group sees a trend of new sat radio subscription numbers dropping, and predicts that interest in satellite both XM or Sirius) . Bridge is having more trouble finding shoppers willing to participate in their surveys, as the Orbitcast piece notes.

One interesting stat is one tracking the percent of new Sirius subscribers who list the main reason for their choice as Howard Stern throughout the current quarter. Data polled on 9/25/2006 showed 18% chose Sirius for Stern-- down from a high of 31% on 7/29/06. The earliest polled date this quarter Stern was the reason of choice for 19%. Bridge estimates that 15% of Q3's news subs are directly because of Howard Stern.

With XM Radio swimming in the wake of competitor Sirius' success with bringing Howard Stern into the satellite radio biz, XM is going after a little of its own star power. The satellite radio network signed TV and publishing personality Oprah Winfrey to the network back in February, and just announced the Oprah talk network to debut today -- September 26.

This is a rather shrewd move by XM that will cost a pretty penny, but there are surely legions of women nationwide who, like their male counterparts and Stern, will have XM radio always handy just to hear their favorite celebrity. It's a formula for success that has worked for Sirius so far, and Oprah has a following just as impressive, if not more. XM hopes it is more.

In a perfect naming convention, the talk channel "Oprah and Friends" will make its debut at 11:00am EST today after being announced as available just yesterday (the official announcement was in February). Nothing like waiting until the last minute and launching right after the announcement to capitalize on the buzz and the incessant need most Americans have for instant gratification.

While Stern notched a reported $500 million deal with Sirius, Oprah's deal is reportedly worth $55 million. In Stern's defense these days, it's hard to not count the amazing 3 million+ customers who have tuned into Sirius since the raw radio personality took to the airwaves last January.