Journalists seem poised to learn all the wrong lessons from Donald Trump’s victory this week, repeating a pattern they’ve been unable to shake since the frenzied days of 2016. A moment from CNN’s “Inside Politics” on Thursday is especially instructive — and an ominous portent of the media’s ability to recapture influence.

Laura Barrón-López is the White House correspondent at PBS News and a political analyst at CNN. On a panel with Dana Bash and John King — the network’s chief political and chief national correspondent respectively — Barrón-López made a claim so objectively false is almost defies believability. Bash and King, of course, found it deeply compelling. 

Reflecting on Trump’s success, Barrón-López mused, “Maybe it’s not so much Democrats policies or messaging or the words that they use specifically, but there is an entire right-wing media ecosystem doesn’t exist on the left, does not exist in center or mainstream, and people are getting their information in very different ways now.”

“Oh yes. It does not exist on the left,” agreed Bash. “Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes,” King repeated.

“And,” continued Barrón-López, “Donald Trump and Republicans and Elon Musk and Joe Rogan know exactly how to reach Americans where they are, regardless of age and demographic.”

Rather than pausing to internalize that very correct point, she proceeded to argue, “That played a big role in this because of the fact that whether it was disinformation, misinformation or different propaganda that they were feeding to the American public that made them feel the way they did.” 

To be clear, the claim here is that “the left” and “center” do not have a “media ecosystem” capable of drowning out the “disinformation” of “right-wing” figures such as Elon Musk and Joe Rogan. One hardly knows where to begin with an argument this absurd. The “right-wing media ecosystem” exists only in reaction to the left’s complete dominance in legacy media, which is quite obviously a vast, multi-billion dollar industry encompassing the broadcast networks, CNN, MSNBC, and major publications. Kamala Harris was formally endorsed by The Atlantic, Vogue, The New York Times, the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Houston Chronicle, the Seattle Times and, for some reason, the Scientific American. The list goes on. 

A Fox News analysis found “In 2016, more than 240 newspapers endorsed Hillary Clinton, while only 20 endorsed Trump. In 2020, 14 newspapers endorsed Trump, and 120 endorsed Biden.” This election cycle, “nearly 80 newspapers endorsed Harris, and fewer than 10 endorsed Trump.” (Fox News, by the way, is virtually the only major corporate news outlet that leans right on most issues.)

With few exceptions, legacy outlets still dominate the all-important web traffic game. As of publication, the top 10 news podcasts on Apple include “The Daily,” “Pod Save America,” “Up First,” “NPR Politics” and “The Bulwark Podcast.” Those shows, all from legacy outlets or anti-Trump new media outlets, are competing right alongside Ben Shapiro, Megyn Kelly, Charlie Kirk, Dan Bongino, and Joe Rogan. 

What’s remarkable is that a few thousand dollars worth of podcasting equipment and some genuine curiosity is basically all Rogan ever needed to find an audience the same size as “The Daily,” which is produced by the New York Times. Unlike the Times, though, Rogan hosts everyone from CNN’s Sanjay Gupta to Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and allows listeners to make up their own minds based on the conversations.

And it’s CNN, the network of Barrón-López and Bash and King, that got embarrassed by Rogan when he confronted Gupta about the company’s pandemic era “disinformation, misinformation, or different propaganda” — to quote Barrón-López. Rogan went from supporting Bernie Sanders to supporting Trump. He’s not “right-wing.” It’s this insistent refusal to understand why decent Americans enjoy him that will doom CNN.

Matt Taibbi made this point in “Racket” on Thursday. “Despite preposterous mis-characterizations as an ‘anti-trans, anti-gay bigot’ who traffics in ‘conspiracy theories,’ Rogan is as middle-of-the-road as a media figure can be,” wrote Taibbi. “In fact, I’d argue this is the key reason he signed a deal worth $250 million, because the show is built on listening, to all points of view. His audience breakdown: 27% of his listeners are Democrats, 32% are Republicans, and 35% are ‘Something else.’” 

Trump’s opponents in media could see his second win as a glass-half-full moment. They could reflect on Gallup once again finding media trust tied for the all-time low it hit in 2017 and finally look inward with some humility. Actually improving would be good for business — as Jeff Bezos seems to be belatedly realizing — good for the country and good for journalists’ souls. It’s not right to see so many of your fellow countrymen as dimwitted and credulous or bigoted and hateful. It’s not right to let those biases steer you into spreading legitimate disinformation about Russia or Covid or a group of school kids from Covington Catholic. 

Some people have ugly beliefs, to be fair, but the vast majority of us just don’t want to be lied to and then patronized and smeared when we’re trying to figure out what happened in the news that day. This is why legacy media, while still powerful, is seeing its influence shrink with no reversal in sight, even after nearly a decade of opportunities for change. Journalists have lost their curiosity, and along with it they’ve lost their empathy and accuracy.