4 Predictions for Hollywood in Another 4 Years of Trump

by

In under 100 hours, the previous host of NBC’s “The Apprentice” is scheduled to resume his role for which he gained international acclaim: President of the United States of America. Donald Trump is officially resuming office, and although there are discussions about a waning resistance, it’s not unreasonable to assume that much of Hollywood is apprehensive about a rerun of his first term in office. The creators of your favorite TV shows and movies anticipate, similar to many sequels, that this one will be far less appealing than the original.

Following the November election, I expressed that it was premature to make predictions about Trump’s impact on the entertainment industry and instead posed some open-ended questions regarding the upcoming four years. Ten weeks later, I still find it questionable to attempt predicting Hollywood’s future under Trump. Yet, as a paid journalist who shares opinions, I acknowledge that “Trump’s Second Act” will likely provide an abundance of topics for public outrage. As I prefer to save my indignation for the cancellation of promising TV shows, I find it prudent to start preparing now. Thus, after a period filled with excessive flattery, media accommodation, and an overwhelming amount of foolishness, I’ve chosen to share these four bold (or apprehensive?) predictions for the next four years. To echo the wise words of Dan Rather, “Courage.

1. Things will get bad — or at least obnoxiously loud — at the FCC.

In the days following Trump’s victory in the 2024 election, I penned an article discussing the ominous remarks made by Brendan Carr, a dedicated supporter of Project 2025 and MAGA follower who currently serves as an FCC commissioner. This individual had stirred up false indignation on Twitter, portraying Kamala Harris’ standard election appearance on Saturday Night Live as an effort by the mainstream media to sidestep equal-time rules and favor the Democrats. In a less polarized time, Carr would have been widely criticized for his biased actions. However, now he stands as Trump’s preferred candidate for the leadership role at the FCC.

In essence, individuals worried about the dominance of media power are looking for an FCC leader who isn’t afraid to address misuses of public airwaves legitimately. Historically, this could involve ensuring broadcasters adhere to their license obligations, such as providing news and educational content that benefits viewers. However, it appears that Carr is more focused on gaining Trump’s favor by targeting perceived adversaries, rather than upholding these principles. For instance, Trump was upset with 60 Minutes for not airing an unedited interview with Harris because he believed it would portray her unfavorably – despite the fact that shows like 60 Minutes typically edit interviews to fit into a compact format. This manufactured dispute led Carr to express concern about 60 Minutes’ editing choices during the FCC’s review of the Skydance acquisition of CBS parent Paramount Global in November, which is highly questionable at best. Unfortunately, some media outlets have been reporting on this behavior as if it were normal, leaving me concerned about what other actions Carr might attempt in his new role.

In a bold move today, current FCC Chair Jessica Rosenworcel, speaking as a movie critic might, waved a red flag for potential viewers of a Carr-led commission. She did this by dismissing a trio of complaints, backed by MAGA supporters, that aimed to restrict free speech, along with another indirectly targeting Rupert Murdoch and Fox News. This action was taken in anticipation of her likely successor, Carr, who has made it clear he will leverage his government platform to intimidate any platforms not aligning with the MAGA ideology. For all those passionate about free speech, this should raise alarm bells.

2. TV platforms will push further right to attract conservative viewers — and appease Trump.

Media executives are consistently seeking content that resonates with the current cultural mood, as they perceive it. Currently, there’s a common belief that the nation is leaning more towards conservative views. While I’m not entirely convinced by this assessment, it’s clear that those responsible for programming decisions are interpreting things in this manner. As early as November, I pondered if Trump’s reappearance would lead to a reduction in content aimed at diverse audiences and possibly an attempt to appeal to Trump’s supporters. Given the events since then, I’m confident this is the direction we’re heading, with many producers likely already assigning their teams to develop shows that reflect the predicted shift in societal trends by 2025. In truth, this trend has been emerging gradually over the past couple of years.

Last week, Disney’s ABC-Hulu unit debuted a half-hour comedy titled “Shifting Gears,” featuring the conservative actor Tim Allen reprising his grumpy boomer character. Similarly, Fox premiered another half-hour comedy called “Going Dutch” starring Denis Leary, who plays a cranky military veteran. Unlike these shows, NBC’s new hit series “Happy’s Place,” led by country music legend Reba McEntire, is not political in nature. However, what these three shows have in common is that they seem to be targeting rural audiences who may have felt underrepresented in the high-end TV programming trend of the past decade. As the industry creates more traditional network-style content, it appears this pattern will continue. On the other hand, it remains unclear just how far Hollywood will go to attract viewers and ticket sales, with a possible indication being if celebrities like Roseanne Barr or Rob Schneider start appearing on mainstream platforms again.

In simpler words:
Three new TV shows were recently released – “Shifting Gears” by Disney, “Going Dutch” by Fox, and “Happy’s Place” by NBC. They have different stars but share a common theme of being aimed at rural audiences who might not have felt represented in recent prestige television. It seems that this trend will continue as the industry produces more traditional shows. However, it is uncertain how far Hollywood will go to gain ratings and box office success, which could be indicated by the return of conservative celebrities like Roseanne Barr or Rob Schneider to mainstream platforms.

3. The resistance will not be televised — but it might be (independently) streamed.

In my previous post from November, I expressed doubt that networks or platforms like Netflix and Amazon would invest heavily in programming targeting the significant number of Americans who opposed Trump’s re-election, especially during his early years in a second term. I also lamented the absence of Samantha Bee on television regularly and wished for her to have another platform to satirize the potential misdeeds of Trump. Stranger things have happened; perhaps Comedy Central is planning to assign her a slot following The Daily Show or even allowing her to host TDS one night per week, similar to Jon Stewart.

Unfortunately, some media companies are cautious about appearing too progressive or diverse due to the Trump Derangement Syndrome, fearing backlash from the Trump administration. While it’s true that anti-Trump viewers may be experiencing fatigue from constant news about the president-elect, this sentiment is likely to shift once he begins implementing his policies. Given that major platforms are unlikely to capitalize on this interest as they did during Trump’s first term, I predict that any successful resistance movement in 2025 will need to find new ways to gain attention and make their voices heard.

YouTube and podcasts are viable options, but they come with a challenge of competing for attention against algorithms. Additionally, don’t overlook over-the-air digital broadcast, remaining parts of the cable bundle, and free ad-supported streaming (FAST) platforms, which have long provided a platform for right-wing viewpoints excluded from traditional media. This is how channels like One America News Network, NewsMax, Real America’s Voice emerged, and much more extreme content followed. It’s surprising that progressive groups haven’t attempted to establish their own versions of these platforms (with the exception of The Young Turks Network, which isn’t solely focused on progressive content). The last Trump administration should have served as a wake-up call for left-leaners to enter the same spheres as conservative outlets, but this didn’t happen. With traditional media companies currently in a timid state, I am hopeful (though perhaps overly so) that this will change, potentially through new platforms such as Mehdi Hasan’s progressive Zeteo or centrist-leaning The Contrarian.

4. Rachel Maddow’s return to nightly news won’t end after Trump’s first 100 days.

Previously in June, while actively engaging on Occupied Twitter, I speculated that MSNBC’s popular anchor might resume a nightly show for several months due to the network’s declining ratings. It turns out my prediction was incorrect about Maddow joining to cover the 2024 campaign, but this week, MSNBC announced her return to a Monday-through-Friday schedule – albeit only for the initial 100 days of Trump’s second term. Interestingly, Comedy Central initially stated that Jon Stewart would return to The Daily Show for a limited time to cover the presidential race before later revealing his commitment to continue until 2025. It seems plausible that something similar may be happening here: I am unsure if Maddow will ever wish to return to a full five-nights-per-week workload, but it would be astonishing if she reverted to her Monday-only schedule by May.

Despite speculation that MSNBC’s ratings may slightly improve following their postelection dip, it’s crucial to acknowledge the significant role Rachel Maddow plays in the network regaining its former momentum. Last year, her weekly show attracted an average of 2.4 million viewers, more than doubling the audience for MSNBC’s other prime-time programs and far surpassing the approximately 1 million viewers tuning into Morning Joe at 6 a.m. Furthermore, Maddow’s presence on Mondays significantly boosts Lawrence O’Donnell’s 10 p.m. show and, in the past, has positively influenced All In With Chris Hayes at 8 p.m. By agreeing to return to a nightly show, Maddow could potentially rejuvenate MSNBC’s prime-time ratings, possibly even returning them to levels comparable to when Trump was still in office or at least significantly closer.

With MSNBC currently under SpinCo management and preparing for new cable deals as a standalone entity, it’s crucial for them to make MSNBC as strong as possible. The recent departure of top executive Rashida Jones adds more uncertainty, so both parties are likely eager to keep Rachel Maddow on the air regularly come springtime. While financial incentives and editorial freedom may not be primary motivators for Maddow, her concern for MSNBC’s vitality suggests a willingness to negotiate a solution that benefits both sides.

Read More

2025-01-17 18:59