Go ahead and pretend like you can comprehend what it means to meld Scripps with Discovery. And not Viacom. I can't really.  Too much red tape and sameness. But what I can do is look at smaller stuff that I find interesting about the deal as a breadcrumb trail.Here's #1: If I were Discovery, I would look hard at TLC’s non-linear ad exposures. They are very small. Over 95% of the Scripps ad exposure is live/same day-- almost 98% for its best performing show, Say Yes to the Dress. That’s challenging in an on-demand future world. Here's #2 Unless you are Facebook and you're trying to find a way to get TV dollars. Why not buy into a fountain from which it pours? Seriously, why not get some programming infrastructure and go real multi-platform? Never mind your app. How loud would Facebook be if they could generate a BILLION (1.067B) TV device ad impressions like this show did IN THE LAST MONTH?  That's time on screen for advertisers like Walmart, Lowe's, Aleve, Hilton, movies studios and the like. It can also be time cross-screen targeted.Data from iSpot.tv which measures ad exposures from the glass of millions of TVs. 

For Discovery, the Future is Female :

#3 People smarter than me had varying opinions:Alexandra Bruell @ WSJ  “A Discovery-Scripps tie-up would create a must-buy network group for advertisers interested in targeting women.” Brian Steinberg @ Variety -- A Scripps purchase … could aid Discovery as the media industry places new emphasis on how programming is distributed in the future, with more consumers turning to streaming video , mobile devices and on-demand consumption. MoffettNathanson Research’s Michael Nathanson says if there ‘s no “material improvement to current ratings and subscriber trends, the timing and cost for either Discovery or Viacom to double down in the U.S. will likely look foolish in hindsight.” -- DeadlineMike Shields @ Biz Insider Viacom walked away from a potential $11 billion bid for Scripps — here are the companies it'd be better off buying)