Justice Department Opens Antitrust Probe of Five TV Networks Over White House Pool Boycott
The US Justice Department said on Saturday it is investigating whether five major television networks violated federal antitrust laws when they suspended pooled coverage of President Donald Trump last month, escalating a weeks-long confrontation between the White House and the press. The networks under scrutiny are ABC, CBS, CNN, NBC and Fox News, the department confirmed.
“Group boycotts among commercial competitors can violate the Sherman Act,” a Justice Department spokesperson said, according to Reuters. “The Antitrust Division is simply investigating to determine whether these news organisations have violated the antitrust laws.” The New York Times first reported the probe; the department has sent formal requests for communications about the pool arrangement to the networks.
How the standoff began
The dispute traces to September 19, when the White House blocked reporters from CNN, Politico and MS NOW from entering the building and revoked their credentials, calling coverage of the president “a privilege — not a right.” The three outlets sued, arguing the exclusions violated the First Amendment and were retaliation for their reporting. A federal judge ordered the White House to restore access, and this week extended that reprieve while a fuller ruling is pending.
During the blackout, the five pool networks declined to carry out their rotating pool duties and agreed not to substitute for CNN on days the administration blocked the network. The television pool — a decades-old arrangement in which networks share the cost and logistics of covering the president in tight spaces such as Air Force One — has served administrations of both parties. As a result of the boycott, the networks did not cover at least one Trump event with Chinese President Xi Jinping, according to NPR’s reporting.
A novel use of competition law
Applying the Sherman Act — a statute written to break up industrial trusts — to news organisations’ coverage decisions would be uncharted territory, and press advocates reacted sharply. “The government should not use antitrust investigations to intimidate news outlets defending press access,” wrote Jose Zamora of the Committee to Protect Journalists. Bruce Brown, president of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, called the probe “another and even more brazen attempt to try to intimidate journalists.”
The investigation lands as the administration’s media battles multiply, from a bruising campaign season to a new White House press secretary taking the podium. Legal analysts note the department must still show the networks acted as commercial competitors colluding to restrain trade — a high bar when the “product” is news coverage of the presidency itself. None of the networks had publicly commented on the investigation as of Monday.
