Facebook's flacks are portraying the appointment as a sign of the maturation of the unruly social network launched in a college dorm. But Zuckerberg and Graham first met in 2005, introduced by a Harvard classmate of Zuckerberg's who worked at the Washington Post, according to Once You're Lucky, Twice You're Good, Sarah Lacy's swiftly fossilizing history of Web 2.0. (The tale does not seem to be well known; Washingtonian reported on the existence of Graham's Facebook page with smirking surprise last year.)

Graham had reached an agreement in principle with Zuckerberg to invest millions of dollars in Facebook, valuing the startup at $40 million. But Accel Partners, a well-known Silicon Valley venture-capital firm swooped in and offered to invest $15 million for 15 percent of the company, a much better deal.

Zuckerberg felt honor-bound to ask Graham for permission to take Accel's money, Lacy reported. "I release you from your moral dilemma," Graham told him. It was a costly decision for the Post, which might now have a stake theoretically valued in the billions of dollars, going by the price Microsoft paid for its $240 million stake in Facebook. Now, Graham will be serving on Facebook's board alongside Accel partner Jim Breyer, whose firm reaped the benefit instead. No hard feelings: The two are Facebook friends.

(Photo by Esthr)

Previously:

• A is for Adelson, who cofounded Digg
• 
  
• B is for Botha, who sold YouTube big
• 
  
• F is for Fitzpatrick, and "hookers and blow"
• 
  

Digg recently inked a $100 million, multiyear ad deal with Microsoft. On those revenues alone, Digg's acquirers could easily justify a $300 million to $400 million purchase price; if Microsoft is paying about $30 million a year for Digg's banner-ad inventory, paying that price would mean a modest 10x to 13x multiple on revenues.

So who is it? A source rules out all the big Internet players — not Microsoft, not Google, not Yahoo. CBS, a big Web acquirer of late, has taken itself out of the running. So who could it be?

Two possibilities: The New York Times Co. and the Washington Post Co. Both the Times' Arthur Sulzberger and the Post's Donald Graham are big believers in a digital future. And both can see firsthand how much traffic Digg contributes to their websites. If I were to place a bet on those two? I'd say the Post, which already owns Slate and has close dealings with Microsoft; Digg's Microsoft ad deal would not discomfit Graham the way it might other businessmen. The Post also has a stronger balance sheet, with a market cap four times the Times'.

That's pure speculation, of course. Acquisition talks fall apart all the time — and for Digg, especially, with its history of almost-but-not-quite deals, I wouldn't be surprised if nothing came of this latest rumor. Still, it's telling that the Valley's talk about Digg has changed from scoffing at its overinflated valuation to talking about who's willing to meet Digg's terms.

Digg CEO Jay Adelson gave me the standard noncomment about "rumors and speculation." But given his transcontinental commute from New York to San Francisco, I wouldn't be surprised if he'd be glad to put his company up for sale. For founder Kevin Rose, a sale would be more emotional. He'd have to be comfortable with whoever buys the company, since he'd likely stay involved. His Diggnation podcast, which draws on headlines from Digg, is one of the centerpieces of his other startup, Revision3. Digg's contentious audience, too, might not take to the site's new owners. That's the biggest obstacle, I suspect, to any deal happening. Those who would profit from the wisdom of crowds must contend with their madness, too.

(Photo by briancaldwell)