The New York Times reports: “The layoffs are slated to shrink the newsroom by hundreds of journalists, cutting into The Post’s local, international and sports coverage.”
Why haven’t the MSM experienced a boom in subscriptions and views with the second Trump administration like they did with the first one?
ChatGPT says: Because the conditions that produced the first Trump media boom no longer exist.
First, novelty is gone. In 2016–2017, Donald Trump was a shock to elite institutions. The press could frame him as an unprecedented emergency. By a second administration, audiences know the script. Outrage without surprise does not convert into subscriptions.
Second, Trump fatigue is real. The first term created an emotional binge cycle. Fear, moral drama, constant alerts. That works once. By round two, many people have learned to tune out rather than mainline cortisol again.
Third, the media burned trust capital. During the first administration, legacy outlets overplayed narratives that later collapsed or aged badly. Russiagate, anonymous sourcing inflation, breathless tone mismatched to facts. For many readers, the press lost credibility as an information source and became an advocacy bloc. People do not pay to be lectured by actors they no longer trust.
Fourth, partisan sorting is complete. In 2017 there was a large persuadable middle that consumed mainstream outlets while being alarmed by Trump. By the second administration, most people are already locked into ideological ecosystems. The remaining anti-Trump audience is saturated and no longer expanding.
Fifth, competition is brutal. Substack, podcasts, X, YouTube, and long-form independent writers now do real-time commentary faster and with clearer point of view. The MSM no longer monopolizes elite narration. Attention that once flowed automatically to cable news and prestige papers is fragmented.
Sixth, Trump himself changed tactics. He is less omnipresent and less reactive to MSM framing. Fewer impulsive feedback loops mean fewer days where the press can drive the story and harvest clicks.
Seventh, moral inflation backfired. Everything was framed as existential last time. When every headline is the end of democracy, audiences eventually discount the signal. Alarmism has diminishing returns.
Bottom line. The first Trump boom was a once-only arbitrage on novelty, fear, and institutional trust. By the second administration, novelty is gone, trust is damaged, audiences are sorted, and the attention economy has moved on. The MSM is now just another factional player, not the indispensable interpreter of events.
Gemini says: The media landscape in 2026 bears little resemblance to the one from a decade ago. While the first Trump administration provided a lucrative boom for legacy outlets—often called the Trump Bump—the second term finds these same institutions struggling against a tide of fatigue and structural change.
The primary driver is a profound sense of exhaustion. Public interest in political combat peaked years ago, and many Americans now actively avoid traditional news cycles. Data from 2025 and early 2026 shows that news avoidance has reached record highs, with a significant portion of the public reporting that following the news makes them feel angry or anxious. Instead of subscribing to keep up with every White House controversy, readers are shifting toward intentional media—content that offers utility, such as lifestyle tips, food, and puzzles. By the start of 2026, non-news content began to account for more than half of total audience engagement for many publishers.
The monopoly that mainstream outlets once held over the national narrative has dissolved. In 2017, cable news and major newspapers were the primary stages for political theater. Today, the audience is scattered across a fragmented landscape of independent newsletters, news influencers, and social media platforms.
The Rise of Influencers: Many viewers now get their updates from individual creators on TikTok or YouTube who offer a more personal, less institutional tone.
Substack and Niche Media: Star reporters have continued to leave legacy newsrooms to start independent ventures. While this provides depth for specific audiences, it dilutes the subscription base for large outlets.
Platform Shifts: Social media giants have moved away from promoting hard news and political content in their algorithms, starving mainstream sites of the referral traffic that previously fueled their growth.
During the first term, a adversarial relationship between the press and the presidency drove subscriptions as a form of civic support. That dynamic has shifted. Some major media owners have shown a greater willingness to avoid direct conflict with the administration, sometimes backing away from endorsements or aggressive investigations to avoid litigation or regulatory pressure. This change in posture has, in some cases, alienated the very subscribers who previously viewed these outlets as a necessary bulwark.
Finally, the broader economic environment in 2026 has made households more selective with their spending. Persistently high prices and economic pessimism have led many to cut “discretionary” digital subscriptions. When forced to choose between a news site and a streaming service or a specialized niche publication, the mainstream news outlet often loses out.
