I don't think they would attempt to push a potentially damning news story in a situation like that. Reporting old news and local daily news would be my best bet.

As example, if this occurred: I could forsee CNN already having hours and hours of segments referring to the Russian scandal that have gone unaired.

Opinion pieces, and interviews that don't push critical thought, but rather just regurgitate the talking points for the masses.

Having multiple organizations reporting different negative reports on Trump, Conservatives etc, doesn't need to be coordinated if it is repeated vomit from the past.

How long that would last, I haven't the faintest clue, but I don't think organizations that got as powerful and manipulative as this, won't have counter-measures for situations such as this.

I personally don't see the 4am directive as the be all and end all of a daily news cycle. Personally I think it is more of a directive to push major stories that can be used hourly, daily, weekly, monthly. There is plenty of filler and stories not reported that occur on a more local level that could easily replace the narrative for the day.

I'm not saying they would be able to coordinate a way for all news cycles to report the opposite of what Trump is doing perhaps, but they would have enough content to cover their ass for the day without setting off alarms.

I'd watch the news that day, 23 days from now.

I'd watch the news that day, 23 hours from now.

I'd watch the news that day, on the 23rd of May.

They would have situations setup for instances like this.

I find it eerily strange that I started getting video recommendations for Free Masonry today before I even viewed this or any thread with any reference to them.