In the wake of Donald Trump’s election, news organizations — caught with their finger distinctly off the pulse of America — are promising to do better. But however well-intentioned, they’re still often missing the point.

Take the New York Times’ public editor’s laudable call for more diversity in the newsroom. “The executive editor, Dean Baquet, is African-American,” Liz Spayd wrote. “The other editors on his masthead are white. The staff with the most diversity? The news assistants, who mostly do administrative jobs and get paid the least.”

The Times, Spayd said, “can be relentless in questioning the diversity at other institutions . . . Fixing its own problems comes less easily.”

But in fact one of the key lessons of Trump’s victory is that newsrooms don’t just have a lack of racial diversity in their reporting pools; they also have a lack of cultural diversity. They need more people who come from a blue-collar background, who perhaps didn’t go to Brown and who can be found in a pew on Sunday on a fairly regular basis.

And journalists need to step out of their geographical, social and political biases to really explore what has been going on in the interior of the country for quite some time.

Our country’s uneasiness began in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks. Since then, Americans have been living under the constant threat of terror, watched presidential and government powers increase exponentially and personally experienced middle-class stagnation.

And yet the obvious harm to Americans’ psyches had gone largely undetected by our politicians and the reporters who chronicle our lives.

That is, until the simmer finally reached its boiling point and rattled the political class this year.

Populism is easy to miss in its infancy. But the ingredients were all there.

Since 2001, our lives have changed drastically: Air travel is demoralizing, we’ve engaged in two fruitless wars, blown up the size of government, made banks and corporations larger and more powerful and then rescued them when they failed — only to make them larger and more powerful again.

We’ve created a new entitlement program, ObamaCare, that has taken a big chunk out of our family budget in return for broken promises; we’ve watched as the world we’re supposed to lead ignored the Syrian government’s ongoing massacre; watched ISIS form right under our noses; and have allowed technology to automate an entire swath of the country’s employment base without replacing those jobs.

We’ve observed our elected leaders mishandle the big things like Hurricane Katrina and the BP oil spill, while ignoring glaring government misdeeds like the deadly Veterans Affairs scandal.

In response, voters have swung the pendulum back and forth between Republicans and Democrats in great big election-cycle waves that should have alerted anyone with a smidgen of curiosity that something was wrong in Peoria.

In 2006, voters sent Republicans packing with a huge shift in the House and Senate, then stuck it to the GOP again by electing President Obama two years later. But it only took the Democrats two cycles to squander that.

Instead of change, they got bigger government, cash for clunkers, wind farms and a stimulus program that either went to Democratic donors’ businesses — like the now-bankrupt Solyndra — or to fill the gaps in state budgets.

By 2010, Democrats were rewarded for their tin ear with an election wave that swept them out of power in even more historic numbers than what brought them in.

Obama misread his re-election win in 2012, leading to an even bigger anti-Democrat wave in the 2014 midterms.

And still no one seemed to fully get it. Even in the aftermath of 2016, Democrats and reporters are still negotiating Hillary Clinton’s loss as if it were a movable object. Obama still thinks he would have won in 2016 had he run. Maybe he’s right. But it certainly doesn’t attempt to explain the fairly large number of people who voted for him twice in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Iowa, Indiana, Wisconsin, Minnesota and Michigan — and then voted for Trump.

They voted for Trump for economic reasons but also for intangible ones. To many, his message was aspirational. They voted for Trump because the movement he led took them out of their small and suffocating towns and made them feel part of something bigger than themselves.

Elites don’t get that because they don’t believe there’s something bigger than themselves. And journalists need to believe there’s something bigger than their newsrooms.