2024-09-25 17:49:08
Although Rupert Murdoch’s family inspired the creators of the serial hit Succession, they had to dramatize the story. Now, however, the reality is becoming more dramatic, which can result in major changes in the American media scene and in the breaking up of one of the richest families in the world.
The reason for the family dispute is the 1999 agreement that billionaire and media mogul Rupert Murdoch signed with his second wife, Anna Murdoch Mann, as part of the divorce proceedings. It stated that their three children would have the same decision-making position on their father’s property as his daughter from his first marriage, or the offspring that Murdoch fathered with other partners.
“If I get hit by a bus tomorrow, it will be up to them to decide which one takes the lead,” Murdoch said years ago, according to the New York Times.
The non-cancellable agreement remained intact for nearly a quarter of a century. But at the beginning of last December, the 93-year-old Murdoch decided to leave all decision-making powers to his son Lachlan.
Three other Murdoch children stood up to their father. Eldest Prudence, who is the most private of all the offspring, film studio owner Elisabeth and investment fund manager James took the dispute to court, claiming that their father had breached the agreement. The two youngest daughters of Murdoch, who were enrolled in the fund, but did not receive decision-making powers, remain on the side of the disagreement.
The court’s decision is important mainly because Murdoch owns some of the most influential media houses in the English-speaking world, such as the American Wall Street Journal, the New York Post, the British tabloid Sun or the American station Fox News.
Through the media, Murdoch has already influenced politics in the past. In the 1990s, for example, he pressured the Sun, a traditionally conservative newspaper, to express support for Labour’s Tony Blair. “We fought back, but in the end we did what Rupert Murdoch wanted,” he quotes one of the editors of the BBC at the time.
Sibling power struggle
The media is also what upset the family and why Prudence, James and Elisabeth didn’t even come to the wedding of their father, who got married for the fifth time this June. The disagreements were over the Fox News television channel, one of the most watched stations in the United States, which has long supported Donald Trump. Although Murdoch Sr. and the former president don’t 100 percent agree, he has noticed the channel’s ratings grow when hosts repeat Trump’s allegations of a stolen election.
In order to increase viewership and thus higher income, Murdoch left the decision-making to Lachlan, who shares his conservative views.
In contrast, Prudence, Elizabeth and James are more liberal and have previously publicly criticized Fox News. The latter, whom his father calls a “problem receiver of money”, even declared that Fox News was harming the American public and, due to “disagreements about certain editorial content”, left the family business a few years ago. But he created a plan to make the channel a reliable source of information again.
An unnamed analyst from the financial district of Wall Street therefore believes that if the decision-making position remained with all the siblings, it would be “fair to assume that the day Rupert dies, Lachlan will be fired”, quoted by the Australian ABC News station.
Money versus objectivity
The court now faces a decision whether to uphold Murdoch’s case or rule in favor of his three children. According to leaked documents published by the New York Times, Murdoch wants to argue that Lachlan is the company’s best choice and can only keep Fox News commercially viable without interference from the siblings.
Therefore, according to the documents, he took away the right to decide the future of the company worth several billion dollars out of goodwill, so that all his descendants could continue to benefit financially from the success of the station.
Prudence, James and Elisabeth Murdoch are suing their father Rupert Murdoch. | Photo: Reuters
Lachlan’s siblings, on the other hand, hope that the court will take into account their belief that the media has a vital role in elections and that only thanks to them can democracy survive. They claim that under their leadership, Fox News would be an unbiased, objective station. For example, in the past, Fox News had to pay $787.5 million in defamation damages for spreading misinformation about rigged voting machines. It was the highest amount for this offense in US history.
One option is that the siblings let themselves be paid off. ABC News believes that this would cost Lachlan three billion dollars (67.7 billion crowns). His property is 2.4 billion (54 billion), but he does not have it in cash, but in investments.
The trial, to which the media do not have access, was managed to be kept secret for a long time, so it is not even certain whether the verdict will be made public. The court should issue it next week. If either party appeals, the decision can be delayed for months or years. In the worst case scenario, the public will only know the outcome after Murdoch’s death.
You might be interested: Trump cannot be evaluated objectively, he constantly lies, says Klvaňa (September 12, 2024)
Spotlight moment: Trump cannot be evaluated objectively, he constantly lies, says Klvaňa | Video: Team Spotlight