Extract from ABC News
Rupert Murdoch outside court in Reno, Nevada, during the September hearing. (Reuters: Fred Greaves)
When the blockbuster TV drama Succession injected a sudden plot twist into its final season, the real-life family that inspired the series took notice.
The award-winning show — about a family that controls a media empire — is, very loosely, based on Rupert Murdoch and his children.
When the cantankerous protagonist dies in the show, his succession plan isn't perfectly clear, and his children go to war over who should get control of his company.
Obviously, this part was not lifted from real life. The 93-year-old Rupert Murdoch is very much alive, and there is no doubt who he wants as his successor: his eldest son, Lachlan.
But the TV death sparked talks among some of the Murdoch children. They started discussing a PR strategy for when life inevitably imitates art and their own father dies, a court document has revealed.
The confidential document, obtained by The New York Times, says a "''Succession' memo" was even written to prevent a real-life repeat of the on-screen chaos.
But it didn't stop the family divide from going on stark display when it went before a Nevada court in September.
Rupert and Lachlan had hatched a plan, potentially ironically named "Project Harmony", to lock in Lachlan's power by stripping it from three of his siblings.
The siblings — James, Elisabeth and Prudence — weren't taking it lying down.
And the court, in its ruling revealed this week, sided with the siblings and blew up Rupert's succession plan.
Rupert Murdoch's 'irrevocable' problem
Lachlan Murdoch currently holds top positions at both major Murdoch companies. He's the chair of News Corp, which owns The Wall Street Journal, The Australian, and Sky News in Australia. And he's both executive chair and CEO of Fox Corporation, which owns Fox News.
It's understood Rupert wants Lachlan to retain control over the companies to ensure they remain influential conservative political forces, which he sees as key to their profitability.
But a problem for Rupert is written into the terms of an irrevocable family trust.
After his death, the trust would evenly split power over his businesses between the four elder children, rather than giving it to Lachlan.
And the siblings are understood to have differing views on the way the companies should cover the news.
James — who was once seen as Rupert's likely successor — resigned from the News Corp board over "disagreements over certain editorial content" in 2020.
He'd earlier criticised News Corp's coverage of climate change during the Black Summer bushfire crisis in Australia.
But whether he and his sisters would push for some sort of change in editorial direction in the Murdoch outlets in the future is unclear.
Fox thrives in tricky times
Fox News, a loud voice in American conservative politics, is one of the financial jewels in the Murdoch empire. It's thriving, despite the challenges facing traditional media.
In November, after Donald Trump's election victory, the network captured a 70 per cent share of the cable news audience — the highest in its history.
"Fox News is definitely influential, and it's because they have a very loyal following," says Johanna Dunaway, the research director of the Syracuse University Institute for Democracy, Journalism, and Citizenship in Washington.
The network wields direct influence over politicians, she says, partly because they know Trump is watching.
His selections for key positions in his administration further highlight Fox News's place in Trump's America. They include former Fox hosts Pete Hegseth (defence secretary) and Mike Huckabee (ambassador to Israel), and contributors Tulsi Gabbard (director of national intelligence) and Tom Homan ("border czar").
Professor Dunaway believes Rupert Murdoch is right about the tie between the success of Fox News and its lean to the right.
"It was right of centre from the beginning," she says. "But as the media industry started collapsing in many areas, it made an even harder turn to the right and has only seen more success as it's done that."
A 'carefully crafted charade'
In seeking the court's approval to rewrite the family trust, Rupert Murdoch had to show he was acting in "good faith" with the sole purpose of benefiting all his heirs.
But the court's probate commissioner ruled that Rupert and Lachlan had brought the case in "bad faith".
We can't tell you exactly what the ruling says, as the court proceedings were closed to the public.
But, according to New York Times reporting, Commissioner Edmund Gorman described the plan as a "carefully crafted charade" designed to protect Lachlan's power "regardless of the impacts such control would have over the companies of the beneficiaries".
The decision also shows that James, Elisabeth and Prudence had "disavowed any plan to oust their brother", and they did not share "any singleness of purpose in changing the management of Fox News".
"The effort was an attempt to stack the deck in Lachlan Murdoch's favour after Rupert Murdoch's passing so that the succession would be immutable," the commissioner wrote.
"It struck me as very strong language," says Reid Kress Weisbord, an expert in estate planning at Rutgers Law School.
The next move
Though there are avenues for Rupert and Lachlan to appeal, Professor Weisbord says that could be an uphill battle.
"The burden is on the person who's objecting to show that the findings of the probate commissioner were clearly erroneous," he says.
In theory, the ruling could be challenged all the way up to the Nevada Supreme Court, but Professor Weisbord expects there will be some sort of settlement.
"Most estate disputes settle," he says. "That's what empirical evidence shows. Most don't fight it until the bitter end."
Professor Dunaway — who co-authored a book on Fox News's influence, The House that Fox News Built? — believes Lachlan Murdoch's siblings are unlikely to want to change his profitable strategy.
But she also acknowledges that emotions could override a simple profit-maximising approach.
"I would hedge my bets to say profit would probably win out," she says.
"But this case is different because these are very wealthy owners. They all have their own vast empires and don't need to be as concerned about profit as a traditional media company owner worried about going out of business.
"So, it really could be that revenge against siblings could override financial considerations."
A spokesperson for James, Elisabeth and Prudence Murdoch said: "We welcome Commissioner Gorman's decision and hope that we can move beyond this litigation to focus on strengthening and rebuilding relationships among all family members."
Rupert Murdoch's lawyer told The Times he intends to appeal.
— with Emilie Gramenz and Phoebe Hosier
No comments:
Post a Comment