It should come as no surprise to “tweeters,” internet readers, and television devotees that the American taste for light comedy and objective journalism has been replaced by a rapacious, “take-no-prisoners,” mentality. In the age of Trump, this development has evolved in accord with the rise and fall and rise again of the Trump phenomenon. First there was Trump the candidate in the crowded field of Republican wannabes. “Hopeless,” “Not a chance,” “The sooner he gives up this ridiculous quest, the better for the Republican brand,” and the ultimate kiss-off “he hasn’t got a chance.” History has a funny way of rearing back and taking a big bite out of such predictions. As all but the Rip Van Winkles around us know, Trump not only emerged the Republican nominee (the field being what it was not a huge accomplishment) but triumphed in the election beating (minority opinion holds that she beat herself) a formidable candidate whom the “paper of record” had deemed a 98% favorite. Donald Trump was unexpectedly the 45th president of the U.S.
That’s when things got ugly. The Hillary mob (she won the popular vote by 3 million giving her lots of vocal supporters) went hunting for a scape goat. They happened on Russia and it was a master stroke. Even though much of the population didn’t live through or has forgotten, the Cold War was a watershed historical moment branding forever the relationship between the U.S. and Russia as uneasy, uncomfortable and unlikely to ever overcome decades of suspicion and animosity. Soon the press, searching for a new, more profitable script, picked up on the meme and were off to the races. “Trump won because Russia infiltrated,” and thanks to a stunning, evidence-free series of exposes, major newspaper sales took on new life with yellow journalism-worthy screaming headlines “Trump’s Scandals Stoke Fear for 2018 Midterms…” Television news and alternate media were feeling the same bump with the same eye-popping “revelations.” Between the actual and the fanciful, a political knife-fight arose that quickly morphed into all-out war —Trump vs the “Serious People.” Violations of the Logan Act (passed in 1798 that forbade private citizens from ‘negotiating’ with foreign governments) were the media’s first foray into criminalizing the new administration. After that storm receded, Trump’s business dealings with Russia (although he claimed he didn’t have any substantive ones) quickly became the news of the day on television (those talking heads were unsparing), in newspapers (editorial writers had a field day) and in the alternate press (“The Devious Aim of Trump’s Trip to Saudi Arabia”—Alternet). After that two or three-day storm passed it was on to some quick hits. Trump’s National Security Advisor given the boot, Trump excoriated for telling the Russians what the Israelis told him, Trump faulted for telling NATO members to pay up or else (much as student debtors are hounded by their pay masters ) and assailed for his preference for dictators over members of the criminogenic NATO (a welcome antidote to the unwavering esteem these thugs have been held in by virtually every other president).
Leave it to the lady who lost to put the icing on the cake. Hillary’s address to the graduating women of Wellesley (her alma mater) was first and foremost a broadside at the man who defeated her. In a snarky but pointed diatribe, she used the example of the Nixon presidency and his resignation in the face of looming impeachment to insinuate a similar fate for the sitting President. The irony? Her husband, the 42nd President of the United States was the only modern President to be impeached and the second overall (Andrew Johnson, Lincoln’s successor was the first).
Segue to the travails of late-night television host, NBC’s Jimmy Fallon whose ratings have plummeted, dropping his show to number two in the race between competing late night shows on NBC and CBS. Things started to go awry for Fallon back in September when candidate Trump was a guest on his show. Jimmy did his schtick as he would with any “normal” guest tossing out a few softball questions and, at a moment forever immortalized on Youtube, reaching over and playfully mussing up Trump’s hair. Further shocking the sensibilities of the American people, it was also revealed that only 50% of Fallon’s monologues since election night have consisted of Trump jokes (the test for a “good” Trump joke —racy, shaming, ridiculing) while close to 100% of his rival’s, CBS’s Colbert, have focused on Trump’s more disagreeable traits, his grandiosity for one. 
To certify his bona-fides as a man on a mission, in a recent rant, Colbert “joked” about oral sex between Trump and Putin (the network bleeped out the salacious part). Was he reprimanded by his bosses, forced to take a leave of absence, think Brian Williams, scolded in a press release, fired? Perish the thought. This is the same network whose CEO quipped (in deadly seriousness) “It [presidential race] may not be good for America, but it’s damned good for CBS…the money’s rolling in and this is fun.” In the fall-out, Colbert climbed over his rival to grab the number one ratings perch.
Then there’s Rachel Maddow, basher extraordinaire. MSNBC’s newest ratings star combines tiresome monologues with an assortment of guests that share her hard-edged take on everything Trump, foul conspiracies designed to bring America down, evil Russian spies, and the looming threat of a Communist takeover. All this and heaven too. She has parlayed her vitriol into a ratings juggernaut (and a cool $7 million salary).
What is it about Colbert, Maddow, Clinton, and lesser talk hosts who haven’t reached top banana status but are nonetheless profiting in a smaller way by their nasty, grouchy coverage on virtually every news outlet? Who or what is behind this disagreeableness? If you guessed the right-leaning lunatic fringe, you’re wrong. These recent tirades come straight out of the playbook of the left with self-described progressives leading the parade. These ranters and ravers are those whom in a kinder, gentler world took pride in their “fair and balanced,” coverage, a world away from the “screaming-meemies” on Fox News and similar media outlets. 
Theirs was not a popular stance and they appeared to be the solitary figures holding up the pitchforks. All that has changed. The comedic genius of Jimmy Fallon and the few hardy soul still in his corner have been overcome by the gibes and hate-filled monologues that get top billing on the corporate media. The news business has followed the same trajectory. The audiences love it. Even the “serious” media dip their toe into the poisoned waters. The Nation: [May 24, 2017] “URGENT POLL: Should Donald Trump Be IMPEACHED (capitalization courtesy The Nation). Trump had been President for 4 months.
Why this hate-filled, bashing, demeaning “new look?” Is it revenge or a desperate scramble to right the bedraggled fortunes of the Democrats? Or simply a way to fatten wallets? Will it become a permanent fixture of the liberal media? Depends on how long the media watchers, news readers, headline gazers will buy into this stew of insult and acrimony. Those profiting by this new yellow journalism would be wise to recall that the underdog is an iconic figure in America. How long before relentless bashing works its magic — Trump in the persona of the underdog fueling a counter-revolution? How long before the left discovers it has built a bridge to nowhere?
