DOJ Probes Media Oligopoly's Shocking Refusal to Carry Water for President

In a stunning display of bureaucratic vigilance, the Department of Justice announced Friday that it is meticulously scrutinizing major television networks for potentially violating antitrust laws. The alleged transgression? A brief, collective moment of independent editorial judgment during the Trump administration, specifically regarding the hitherto sacred 'pool coverage' of the then-President. Sources close to the investigation, who requested anonymity lest they be accused of forming a cartel, suggest the DOJ is determined to uncover whether these media behemoths colluded to *not* broadcast every single pronouncement, gesture, or accidental sound from the nation's highest office. The implications are staggering: if networks can decide what to cover, what's next? Deciding *who* to cover? Legal experts, many of whom have been seen muttering 'this is fine' while surrounded by literal flames, indicate that the core of the DOJ's inquiry centers on proving a 'conspiracy to not enable' — a groundbreaking legal theory positing that a group's *failure* to perform an expected, uncritical service for a public figure constitutes anti-competitive behavior. Imagine, if you will, the chilling precedent: soon, cereal companies could be investigated for not offering 'breakfast pool coverage' to your cat, or your local plumber for refusing 'uninterrupted access' to your leaky faucet. The American public, long accustomed to their news being delivered with the unwavering dedication of a particularly loyal retriever, awaits the verdict with bated breath, eager to see if their right to unfiltered presidential content will be restored to its rightful, constitutionally mandated, and frankly, very loud, glory.