A couple observations here:
1. It's always interesting to see the dozen or so "problem" media outlets brought up time and time again as if they make up the entirety of "our media" while ignoring dozens of other sources that are sympathetic to Trump and his "plight". For every CNN there is a Breitbart. For every MSNBC there's an Info Wars. For every CNBC there's a OANN, but I NEVER see those sorts of things brought up in terms of "the media".
2. I think the answer lives somewhere in the middle. I think it's pretty clear this started back in 2014-15 where all of them FLOCKED to Trump and his insane Howard Stern like media events to cover him. This was a primary reason I really gave up on any of our national media outlets. Why? Because they were covering him for the shock factor and then laughing at the things he was saying rather than raising the red flags. I fully admit I was one that thought he was just pandering initially. And honestly, I wouldn't blame any media outlet that thought the same thing. To that extent I am with
@CletiusMaximus. They treated him like a cartoon character that was getting them eyeballs. Had they been doing their jobs, he likely wouldn't have ever seen the nomination. However, seeing the error of their ways (this might be wishful thinking on my part) and knowing their hand in helping get this clown elected, once he was in office a good many of them flipped to the complete opposite and criticized every little thing (no matter how stupid) in an effort to mock and belittle. They dropped down into the mud with him to get their eyeballs. To that extent I agree with
@rockaction