For the past eight years, the media has dedicated the bulk of its energy, and the best of its talent, to promoting the idea that Trump is an existential threat to the United States. It’s taken many forms, from the Russia collusion hoax (solicited and paid for by the Clinton campaign) to the recent Hitler hysteria, when journalists tried to convince the public that Trump is literally the second coming of the man who systematically murdered six million Jews (albeit one with an Orthodox Jewish daughter).

So you might expect the media’s response to last night’s apocalyptic outcome — not only a second Trump term, but one delivered with a sweeping win in the popular vote, Senate, and likely House — to be equally hyperbolic. And to an extent, that’s true. A number of the country’s mainstream outlets spent the early hours of the morning spinning up new Manichean narratives and fresh paranoid metaphors about this “dark” moment. But, a notable swath of the media’s coverage has been uncharacteristically sane.

Today, what we’re seeing is a forking of the American media, with a handful of elite, traditionally liberal outlets doubling down on the fascism narrative, leaning into their (white?) rage, and concluding the problem is Them, Not Us — the majority of Americans are racist, and that’s why Donald Trump will be the 47th president. But we’re also seeing a newly sober approach, at least thus far, by mainstream outlets that seem to understand they’re facing a different Trump, one who’s not only wiser to the mechanics of power but also now has a mandate from the American public, including millions of former Democratic voters.

The most striking example of the former trend — blaming Americans for ruining democracy — is the New York Times, whose homepage is stuffed with inflammatory headlines and fascist allusions in virtually every quadrant (the paper changed multiple headlines above the fold whiile I was writing this; see screenshot below). The all-caps headline of its main story reads “TRUMP STORMS BACK” — with its unsubtle, blitzkrieg-esque verb making NYT’s position crystal clear — while its subhed speaks to a “Stunning Return to Power After a Dark and Defiant Campaign.” A separate article above the fold declares that Trump’s victory kickstarts a “New Era of Uncertainty,” and yet another piece labels him a “Pariah, Felon, President-Elect.”

But it’s an analysis by Times national political correspondent Lisa Lerner that distills the paper’s position to its most salient and disturbing point. Titled “America Hires a Strongman,” the essay employs the kind of martial framing and booming rhetoric readers would have encountered in the reporting of William Shrirer’s coverage of Germany during the rise of an actual — yes, “literal” — tyrant. The first full paragraph alone is a litany of what the writer construes as Trump’s campaign “plans,” which include: “use military force against his political opponents,” “crush the independence of the Department of Justice,” “push public health conspiracies,” “turn [the] government into a tool of his own grievances,” and “punish his critics.” In case readers weren’t yet clobbered into submission, Lerer clarifies: “He would be a ‘dictator’ — if only on Day 1.”

And all of the above is mere prelude. The real thrust of the piece comes next. “[W]hen asked to give him the power to do all of that, the voters said yes,” Lerer writes. She then calls Trump’s victory a “conquering of the nation not by force but with a permission slip.” It’s a breathtaking indictment — not of Trump, but of the American people. The point the article is making is chilling: Trump is Trump, always has been. But now, the American people — who elected a “dictator” — have become party to his sinister plot to overthrow America and end democracy for good.

Even for the Times, this is a lurch into paranoid leftism. But the Gray Lady is not the only outlet that, in its muted rage, is turning on Americans. During PBS’s election night coverage, Jonathan Capehart — a Washington Post editorial board member and MSNBC host — expressed his dismay at the election outcome. After listing out Trump’s various offenses, including his numerous indictments, Capehart turned his anger on the American people, asking, “Who are we as a country? We’re starting to find out. From what I’m seeing right now, I’m not sure I like it.”

The Atlantic — the premier news magazine of the East Coast elite establishment — joined the chorus of media outlets blaming the public. In its lead story this morning, “Trump Won. Now What?,” Republican-operative-turned-Democrat-apparatchik David Frum pursues the same line of attack: Trump’s election is so heinous it signals the death of the America we knew, and the birth of a new, morally grotesque United States. “As a result of this election,” he writes, “the United States will become a different kind of country.” Frum advises Atlantic readers (and himself) to “learn to live in an America where an overwhelming number of our fellow citizens have chosen a president who holds the most fundamental values and traditions of our democracy, our Constitution, even our military in contempt.” And in case the point wasn’t clear, the Atlantic has a second piece pounding it home. Called “There Is No Constitutional Mandate for Fascism,” the piece by Adam Serwer argues that, despite what voters (in his opinion) believe, “Americans cannot vote themselves into a dictatorship any more than you as an individual can sell yourself into slavery.” This is, frankly, apoplectic to the point of being incoherent.

Those hot takes notwithstanding, some mainstream coverage has been surprisingly down the middle. As of this writing, CNN’s homepage is devoid of the inflammatory rhetoric featured by the Times, and even features a video on “The Traditionally Democratic Voters Who Helped Trump Win.” In fact, the network’s most viral moment came when chief national correspondent John King explained to anchor Jake Tapper that Harris failed to outperform Biden’s 2020 results in a single state. “Literally nothing?” an incredulous Tapper asked. “Literally nothing,” King responded.

Maybe most weirdly, Joe Scarborough and Mika Brzezinski — two commentators whose hatred of Trump virtually seeped from their pores — seemed, at least for a brief moment in time, to almost celebrate Trump’s win. Scarborough, a nominal Republican who spent the last eight years lambasting Trump on virtually every Morning Joe segment, admitted, “This is the biggest red wave I’ve seen since Ronald Regan’s 49-state victory in 1984.” (Scarborough later reverted to form in a conversation with Al Sharpton that went viral on X, in which he blamed Harris’ loss on misogyny and interminority racism among black and Hispanic voters.)

For its part, the Washington Post, which only last week was convulsed by newsroom outrage after its owner, Jeff Bezos, reportedly blocked its endorsement of Harris, is similarly sedate in its post-election coverage (again, as of the time of this writing). Its massive banner headline simply (triumphantly?) reads “A TRUMP COMEBACK,” while its lead story is soberly titled, “He becomes 2nd president to win nonconsecutive terms.”

We got a rare glimpse into the reasoning behind this approach when Bezos, obviously ignoring the preemptively hurt feelings of his newsroom, quickly congratulated Trump with an almost-effusive post on X: "Big congratulations to our 45th and now 47th President on an extraordinary political comeback and decisive victory” — not to mention his op-ed about blocking his paper’s endorsement of Harris. It seems that at least this one high-profile media owner is wary of tangling with a media-savvy fellow billionaire who also now happens to have his hands on the levers of American power.

It’s almost as if no corporate player struggling in the ailing news industry wants to get into a wrestling match with Trump this early on. Politico, owned by publishing giant Axel Springer, offered readers a look at the kind of sweeping changes a better politically-armed Trump administration could make this morning. CBS, ABC and NBC news presented straight stories mixed with infographics and analysis. Coverage on the more sane side of the divide is almost boring.

There’s no doubt the press will pivot as it attempts to navigate an entirely revised political and cultural environment. But there may be change afoot, both for the better and the worse, and with the public now keeping tabs on Elon’s X, the media may have learned that, this time, it’s best to watch its step.

— Ashley Rindsberg