MSNBC.com, which is a joint venture (JV) between Microsoft (NASDAQ: MSFT) and GE (NYSE: GE), has been around for about 11 years. Interestingly enough, the JV hasn't struck any acquisitions – that is, until now.

MSNBC has agreed to buy social media site, Newsvine (the price tag was not disclosed).

In fact, Newsvine has only five employees and raised a mere $1.5 million in venture capital. Yet, the company certainly is efficient. After all, the growth has been strong and the website gets about 1 million unique visitors per month.

Then again, Newsvine leverages the power of its community. Users can vote and comment on articles, which creates lots of frequency and loyalty.

What's more, Newsvine will keep its identity, which is smart. It's often the case that a big organization can dampen innovation.

But, I'm sure we'll start seeing some cross pollination, such as placing Newsvine features on MSNBC.com.

And, if you want to check out other recent M&A transaction, click here.

Tom Taulli is the author of various books, including The Complete M&A Handbook and The Edgar Online Guide to Decoding Financial Statements.

Microsoft Corp. (Nasdaq:MSFT) has angered the Wikipedians by offering to pay someone to correct what it says was wrong information on the site.

The company took this route - which the Wikipedia says is very, very wrong - because it says that it wasn't able to get the wrong information corrected by Wikipedia volunteers. To add insult to injury to the world's largest software company, the offending information was about open source software.

Setting aside whether Microsoft's complaint was legitimate or not, I find Wikipedia's response really odd. The Associated Press quotes founder Jimmy Wales as saying that "the proper course" for Microsoft would have been to commission a white paper, post it on an outside Web site and link it to a Wikipedia discussion forum.

"It seems like a much better, transparent, straightforward way," he told the AP.

Really? It seems like this would just cause more arguments from people wondering why Microsoft is trying to influence the Wikiepedia. Moreoever, why should someone have to go through all of that trouble to correct information that's wrong. It seems unfair.

Remember what happened to John Siegenthaler? Someone added to his Wikpedia biography that the one-time assistant attorney general was implicated in the assassinations of both John and Robert Kennedy. That bogus information was removed but it underscores the notion about not believing everything you read.

In other Microsoft news, the company signed basketball star LeBron James to promote Windows Vista.

As is typical with Microsoft Corporation (NASDAQ: MSFT), the company is entering yet-another red-hot market. This time it's YouTube territory.

Hey, it's growing like a weed – as YouTube generates over 100 million video views per day. And given Microsoft's huge Internet infrastructure and smart programmers, cloning a YouTube is a no-brainer.

So you can check out the Microsoft beta at soapbox.msn.com. The site allows users to do things like upload videos and, yes, share videos. The site even works with Firefox.

But if you want to try it, you might be out-of-luck. The new site is by "invitation only" until the kinks are worked out.

Building a video community is not easy -- despite the huge user base and content that Microsoft has. Besides, YouTube is relentlessly making headway with all this anyway and has been able to beat-out biggies like Google Inc (NASDAQ: GOOG).

So don't expect this to propel Microsoft to the number one spot in this category any time soon.

Tom Taulli is the author of various books, including the Complete M&A Handbook and operates InvestorOffering.com.

Back on August 1, 1981, MTV started a revolution. It reflected the youth culture, as well as influenced it.

However, over the past few years, MTV has seen a variety of major threats, such as MySpace.com and YouTube.com.

Well, finally, MTV is revving things up – and yes, adding social networking and user generated videos.

In fact, this will be in the form of a new channel (hey, I thought the youth don't watch TV anymore?) It's name is "Flux" and it hits the airwaves on September 6th (it will be in the UK). Although, you can check out the Web site.

So, is this mostly a retread? Well, there is something interesting. That is, if you produce a super cool video, it might wind up on the cable channel.

Let's face it, young people like getting attention. While it's fun to get visibility on a major web site, it is likely to be more thrilling to get on to real tube.

Even after 25 years – despite tough competition – it looks like MTV still has its groove.

There are a variety of factors that explain the hyper success of YouTube: ease-of-use, guerilla marketing and the power of sharing.

Recently, however, YouTube violated its principle of sharing (and community); that is, it changed its Terms and Conditions (TOC). This is a common feature of Web sites – to handle the legal technicalities. In fact, it's usually a bunch of jargon that most users simply ignore.

Well, given the size of YouTube, some users did read the latest TOC – and it caused an immediate stir in the blogosphere.

Essentially, the new YouTube TOC grants the company the right to sell your content. In legalese: YouTube gets a "worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free, sublicenseable and transferable license to use, reproduce, distribute, prepare derivative works of, display, and perform the User Submissions ..."

Trying to put out the fire, a YouTube spokesperson indicated that the company does not own the user-generated content.

Although, the clause does give YouTube the right to make money off your content. And, there is no sharing. All the money goes to YouTube.

Interestingly enough, there are other video sites that are giving its content creators a cut of the revenue, such as Revver and Eefoof.com.

Then again, should users really complain? After all, YouTube.com is subsidizing the cost of hosting videos. Besides, YouTube.com gets over 100 million video views per day (and is far ahead of other major sites, like Yahoo, Microsoft and Google). In other words, aspiring film producers have a ready audience for their work.

So, why not allow YouTube.com to make a buck?

It's official: the ultra popular video site, YouTube, is getting more than 100 million video views per day. In fact, competitors like Yahoo, Microsoft, Google and AOL have only single-digit market share in the video market.

But, this is not to say YouTube is guaranteed to be the winner in the video category. After all, MySpace has almost 20% of the market.

Ok, so what is this market? It's a new one. And it is growing at hyper-speed. Why?

First, much of the content is user-generated; that is, anyone with a video camera and access to the Internet can easily become a film producer. Next, online videos are short-form (roughly two minutes or so). This makes it easy to consume (and, to consume lots of videos).

Something else: Companies like YouTube have used Web 2.0 techniques to drive traffic, such as allowing people to share their videos – and thus spread them virally.

Most importantly, much of the content is free. That's certainly a way to gain traction, huh?