Members of the media continue to talk among themselves, as if they had not been repudiated by the people on November 8. Mass firings and new faces are needed if the media are going to have any hope of regaining any credibility with the public.

Some on the far-left are waking up. Anis Shivani of the AlterNet news service asked, “Is the liberal media dead?” She answered: “One of the positives of this campaign is that despite relentless 24/7 propaganda about Trump, exaggerating his personal foibles while painting anyone not supportive of Hillary as a closet misogynist, racist or even sexual predator, the message failed to get through. In the end, no one paid any attention. Those inside the elite bubble were persuaded that they were headed for victory, hearing nothing contrary in their own ecosphere, when they were in fact doomed. The people have shown that they can tune out this noise. The media has fragmented so much that only those who are already persuaded come within the ambit of any new message, so in essence they have pounded their way into their own irrelevance (emphasis added).”

Hillary Clinton had the endorsements of most major newspapers in the United States. Her own website declared, “By all accounts, this election is historic—and so is the list of newspapers from across the country endorsing Hillary Clinton for president. That list includes a number of papers that, for decades, have exclusively endorsed Republican presidential candidates—until now.”

Reid Wilson of The Hill newspaper calculated that Clinton got 57 newspaper endorsements and Trump got only 2.

In addition to The Washington Post and The New York Times, which both endorsed Hillary, some of the other notable losers included:

The Columbus Dispatch endorsed a Democrat (for the first time since Woodrow Wilson), and urged voters to elect Hillary. Ohio went for Trump anyway.

The Akron Beacon said that Hillary was the change this country needed.

The Cincinnati Enquirer broke a century-old tradition to endorse Hillary.

The Sun Sentinel editorial board urged Floridians to vote for Hillary. Florida went for Trump.

The Arizona Republic broke a 120-year tradition to endorse Hillary. Arizona went for Trump.

The Dallas Morning News broke a 75-year tradition of supporting Republicans to endorse Hillary. Texas went for Trump anyway.

The Houston Chronicle, the largest newspaper in Texas, usually backs Republicans but endorsed Hillary.

Among major voting blocs, one of the most amazing turnarounds can be found in the Catholic population.

On November 2, the Catholic Jesuit publication America was reporting that Clinton was leading Trump in the polls thanks to the Catholic vote. Citing a poll from the Public Religion Research Institute and the Institute for Policy Research & Catholic Studies at The Catholic University of America, Clinton was getting support from 51 percent of Catholics, compared to 40 percent for Donald Trump. This is what liberal Catholics wanted to believe and encourage. Hillary’s campaign chairman John Podesta was a liberal Catholic who got a job as professor at Catholic Jesuit Georgetown University. He had communicated with other campaign officials about a scheme to force the church even further to the left. Elizabeth Yore’s article at The Remnant explained the relationship between George Soros, the Clinton campaign and the Jesuit-led Vatican.

However, exit polls show that Trump won the Catholic vote by a margin of 52 to 45 percent. What happened?

One answer is that Catholics are bypassing the liberal media and turning to alternative sources of news and information, such as The Remnant. Another such source is Boston Catholic Insider, which argued in an article, “Why Catholics Should Vote for Trump,” that Hillary had a “monstrous” position on abortion that justified the gruesome procedure up to and including the time of birth.

Another growing source of news and information for Catholics and non-Catholics is LifeSite. Its post-election stories include “Liberal media in meltdown over Trump election” and “America rejects Planned Parenthood and its party.”

Another important development was the airing of the film “A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing” by the EWTN Catholic cable channel. As we noted in a previous column, the film examined how Marxists have subverted the church from within by recruiting clergy into revolutionary socialist activities that divide people and cause conflict. The film was described as “a lens into America’s cultural Marxism euphemistically called ‘progressivism.’”

As long as the members of the liberal media continue in their old and discredited ways, without major changes in the journalism business, the alternative sources of news and information will continue to grow in power and influence. The new conservative network CRTV has just announced that Steven Crowder, from the popular show “Louder with Crowder,” is joining the new media venture.

Even with major changes in the liberal media, such as the firing of liberal hacks and the hiring of solid conservatives, it is doubtful that viewership can be maintained. On outlets like CNN, they will continue to talk and act like they still have some credibility left. The public is laughing at them and declaring, “You’re fired.”