I'll take a stab.
I disagree that there needs to be benefit, just a reason. And even if you want to talk benefit and money, the odd thing about the Dallas Cowboys is that results have zero impact on the money for the team or the league. In fact, there may even be a negative correlation, or maybe Jerry is just so damn good at marketing it doesn't matter. In any event, the Cowboys have been irrelevant for 25 years in terms of true success yet both the league and Cowboys have flourished financially, so clearly there is no financial danger to either entity due to damaging the on field performance of the Boys. As long as the Boys are in the league, money will be made. Hell, you could argue the league is conspiring to keep the Boys in the news since the team is so piss poor right now.
I'd argue there is a bias over conspiracy, unless we're going to equate the two. There are so many examples to show bias. But any "evidence" has to be circumstantial, kind of like proving the existence of some creature not by actually finding the creature but by things left behind by the creature. And of course anything I could say you will have anti-arguments because there is no "hard" evidence.
Handling of Josh Brown vs. Zeke most recently. Uncapped year punishment. Lack of Romo's roughing the passer calls. Critical calls against in almost every big game at critical times vs. literally close to zero beneficial bizarre calls. The Pats finally get punished for something once Kraft sidles up with Jerry.
All I know is that before Jerry signed his own marketing deals and won that lawsuit, Dallas got almost every controversial call and most things went their way (except against the Steelers and 49ers, who really seem to be the golden franchises). After that lawsuit, the count is like 187-2.
Or maybe I'm just a homer who can't come to grips with what has become of this team.