The infamous media titan Rupert Murdoch is engaged in a secret legal fight with a group of his children to determine the future of the empire.
A series of shocking revelations uncovered by The New York Times this week have exposed the details of the family clash and is sending shockwaves across the industry as the future of one of the largest conglomerates in the media business is on the line.
Rupert Murdoch’s companies are valued at nearly $20 billion as per Forbes estimates. The billionaire founder of the empire is now 93 years old and it is just a matter of time until the family will be confronted with serious questions about who will get or run what.
Commentators have teased that the Murdoch’s saga may have inspired the incredibly popular HBO series called “Succession”. What are they fighting about and what is at stake? We will cover as much as we possibly can in this article for those unfamiliar with what has been transpiring behind the scenes.
Murdoch Angered his Sons After Making Key Changes to the Family Trust
In late 2023, Rupert Murdoch filed a petition to make changes to the trust that holds major voting rights on Fox Corp and News Corp. The legal entity, established around 25 years ago, gave the billionaire’s heirs equal rights to have a say in the affairs of the two companies.
The modification he requested would give his oldest son and successor, Lachlan Murdoch, exclusive control over the trust. This was the catalyst that turned the remaining heirs against their father as they wouldn’t have any right to decide over the world’s most influential media conglomerates if things remain as is.
The initial arrangement ensured that the sons of Murdoch would have to be in agreement to make key decisions about the conglomerate. However, under the new scheme, Lachlan would effectively be able to do as he pleased once his father passes away.
Fox Corp and News Corp own several influential media outlets including Fox News, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Post, and major newspapers and television stations in Australia and Britain.
Court documents obtained by the NYT reportedly state that Murdoch was concerned about the possibility that the other three sons who had voting power – James, Elisabeth, and Prudence – would interfere with the decisions made by Lachlan and put the company’s future in jeopardy.
Also read: Top 10 Media Companies in the World by Market Capitalization
Moreover, Murdoch appears to be aiming to ensure that the media company’s political agenda remains intact and fully under Lachlan’s control.
The trio has now united forces to contest their father’s changes to the trust and argue that Murdoch is acting in bad faith and is violating the spirit of the trust that he once created. The alliance has divided the family into two trenches – the pro-Lachlan front and the ‘keep the status quo’ front.
The political stance of these three sons appears to be an issue for Murdoch. For example, James has been particularly critical of his the conglomerate’s conservative views. In 2020, he left the company citing “disagreements over certain editorial content.”
In response to their father’s actions, James, Elisabeth, and Prudence have joined forces to mount a legal challenge. They argue that their father is not acting in good faith and is violating the spirit in which the trust was created.
This unexpected alliance has brought together siblings who have often been at odds in the past. James, in particular, has been a vocal critic of the family empire’s obvious conservative bent, having left the company in 2020 citing “disagreements over certain editorial content.”
A Trial is Scheduled to Begin in September to Determine if Rupert is Acting in Good Faith
The legal process is being held in Reno, Nevada where the family can enjoy enhanced privacy protections. In June, the Nevada probate commissioner, Edmund Gorman Jr., asserted that Murdoch had the right to make changes to the trust as long as he could prove that he was acting in good faith and with the best interests of all of his heirs in mind.
“A rational fact finder could find that the determination that the Amendment was in the best interests of the beneficiaries was made with ‘[d]ishonesty of belief, purpose, or motive,’ i.e., in bad faith,” Gorman highlighted in a 48-page document that discussed his decision to modify the legal entity’s articles of association.
However, the case will be going to trial in September this year and the outcome would either confirm the commissioner’s decision or could favor the three plaintiffs who have contested the modifications.
NYT Breaks the Secrecy by Exposing the Commissioner’s Decision
The family feud is primarily rooted in the political differences between Murdoch and some of his sons. When Donald Trump was in power, the media mogul and Lachlan had similar views about the company’s editorial and political lean.
This bond caused discomfort among the other three sons. Despite their ache, Murdoch announced in September 2023 that Lachlan would succeed him as the leader of the media empire. The 52-year-old took over as Chairman of Fox Corp and News Corp shortly just four years after the company sold 21st Century Fox to Disney.
Murdoch is aiming to preserve the editorial policy he has long held for the two conglomerates and he believes that allowing his four children to have equal voting power could “impact the strategic direction” of the companies.
“… only by empowering Lachlan to run the company without interference from his more politically moderate siblings can he preserve its conservative editorial bent, and thus protect its commercial value for all his heirs,” Murdoch claimed according to court documents.
One of the most remarkable aspects of this family drama is how it has managed to remain hidden from public view for so long. The legal proceedings have been taking place in a Nevada probate court, which is known for its strong privacy protections.
The secrecy was finally breached when The New York Times obtained a copy of the commissioner’s documented decision. This document sheds light on the intense behind-the-scenes maneuvering that has been taking place within the Murdoch family.
Both the legacy and future of Murdoch’s media empire are on the line as a result of these legal proceedings. The outcome will determine how his children will rule over the large corporations he built once he passes.
What is perhaps more worrying is how fractured family relationships will be no matter what the outcome is. These legal rifts will surely cause tensions between the heirs and may give Lachlan unnecessary headaches, even if the court rules in his favor.
The consequences of the feud became evident as none of the three opposing children attended Murdoch’s recent wedding to Elena Zhukova, his fifth wife, in California. Only Lachlan was present at the ceremony.
A Rapidly Evolving Media Landscape is a Threat to the Future of the Murdoch Empire
The drama is unfolding in a rapidly evolving media landscape where understanding the role of digital platforms and changing consumer habits is crucial to successfully pivot to a new era where a smartphone can be as effective as a pricy camcorder to report major news.
The Murdoch empire is not free of challenges in this environment and disagreements within the controlling family may make it difficult for the controlling heir – Lachlan – to successfully navigate these complex societal changes where commercial success is heavily tied to editorial savviness.
As the September trial approaches, all eyes will be on the Reno courtroom where the fate of the Murdoch empire will be decided. The outcome of this case could have far-reaching consequences not just for the Murdoch family but for the media industry as a whole.
Regardless of the trial’s result, it’s clear that the Murdoch family saga is far from over. The deep divisions exposed by this legal battle are likely to shape the future of the company for years to come and could influence the political landscape in the US and overseas.