Rupert Murdoch is set to face his kids in court, with Fox News’ fate in the balance
The future of Fox News — one of the most influential players in television and conservative politics — appears likely to be determined, improbably, by a probate court official in Reno, Nevada. Absent a last-minute settlement, the trial begins Monday.
The proceedings more broadly involve the disposition of 93-year-old Rupert Murdoch’s global media empire, which also includes the Wall Street Journal, the Times of London, the Australian and the New York Post.
Murdoch wants to amend his trust to hand off full control to his eldest son, Lachlan, who is currently running their companies. Lachlan’s three eldest siblings — those who are poised to share control of the business with him after their father dies — oppose the change. The two youngest children — daughters from Rupert Murdoch’s third marriage — share equally in the financial bounty, but have been promised no control.
The stakes and arc of the family’s struggles are Shakespearean and inspired the HBO drama Succession; the pettiness can sometimes seem Seinfeldian. The court battle is about money and power, but also whether Fox News should remain relentlessly partisan and right-wing as part of a business plan to yield the best results.
Lachlan’s siblings appear to be less enamored of the hard-right line. His only brother, James, has become increasingly critical of the pro-Trump and often anti-news populism embraced by the network.
“If they were to change the direction and move [Fox News] into the direction of a CNN format, or go down the middle, it will lose its identity, lose viewers and lose revenues,” says Joe Peyronnin, a veteran network news executive who served as Fox News president in its earliest stages, in the mid-1990s.
“I say that as someone who is a journalist and who would love to see that change,” Peyronnin adds. “They have been the single most divisive entity in the last 30 years in politics. If there was no Fox News, we’d still have mud fights, but it wouldn’t be like today.”
A compromise to sidestep a nasty divorce trial
Murdoch’s petition to change the terms of the trust were first cited by the New York Times and subsequently affirmed to NPR by three people with ties to various interested parties. Those people spoke to NPR on condition they not be named, as the probate commissioner has ruled the proceedings – and even the identities of the parties involved – are confidential.
The probate official has ruled against a motion by NPR and other news organizations to open up the trial for public view.
The legal battle stems from a fateful decision a generation ago: Murdoch agreed to set up an irrevocable family trust to sidestep a battle royal over his assets when he left his second wife, Anna Torv Murdoch Mann. He gave his four oldest adult children equal shares and equal control over his holdings after his death.
In exchange for the agreement — and a $110 million payout — Murdoch Mann agreed to forgo a protracted fight over her share of his media holdings.
(Rupert Murdoch’s younger two daughters with his third wife, Wendi Deng, were ultimately given full financial parity with their siblings, but no voting control in the trust. He had no children with his fourth wife, Jerry Hall. He married his fifth wife earlier this year.)
Rupert Murdoch believes Lachlan will stay the course
After years of corporate competition between James and Lachlan, the elder brother prevailed: Lachlan is now executive chairman of Fox Corp., the television wing of the empire, and chairman of News Corp., its publishing arm.
The stock price of News Corp. has soared in the five and a half years since Lachlan took over. That of Fox Corp. has been bumpier. Due to a massive phone-hacking debacle involving News Corp.’s British tabloids and a series of defamation suits involving Fox News, both arms have been mired in costly and debilitating legal scandals.
In Reno, Rupert Murdoch is arguing that Prudence, Elisabeth and James are likely to soft-pedal the network's ideology, which would undermine its appeal to its right-leaning audience. Rupert and his four eldest children are expected to show up in court this week.
People who have worked for Rupert Murdoch say he is incensed by the dispute.
He believes that he was the singular force propelling the creation of this $32 billion continent-hopping media juggernaut from the single paper in Adelaide, Australia left to him by his father; that he should determine who controls the companies, though they are publicly traded, by right and to avoid confusion and litigation after his death; that his children were well taken care of when they each received $2 billion from the sale of major Fox entertainment properties to Disney in 2019; and that he and Lachlan have led the twin television and publishing companies ably since that sale.
The Wall Street Journal recently reported that after that sale to Disney, Rupert Murdoch asked each of his four eldest children to give him more than $100 million. Lachlan, Prudence and Elisabeth did so. James refused. (The Journal is ultimately controlled by Lachlan Murdoch; its reporting has not been publicly challenged.)
Over the years, various children have flitted in and out of favor with their father. Rupert pitted the two boys, in particular, against each other. Prudence, the eldest by his first wife, often served as her dad’s adviser as she forswore any corporate ambition. Elisabeth attended the Super Bowl in early 2023 with Rupert (and Elon Musk). She did not attend her father’s wedding earlier this year. Neither did James. By then, they were already on opposing sides in court.
Other Murdoch children question Rupert and Lachlan’s leadership
James and his wife Kathryn Murdoch have emerged as strong philanthropists for climate change, voting rights and other liberal causes. He has advocated for Fox to more closely resemble the centrist and less confrontational Sky News in Europe, which James oversaw when it was in the Murdoch fold. James has criticized Murdoch’s Australian publications over coverage of global warming and Fox over its treatment of the 2020 election and the January 6 siege of Congress.
Those with links to James, Elisabeth and Prudence say that under their father and brother, the companies have taken dire hits. The scandals that have beset the empire on both sides of the Atlantic have cost well over $2 billion so far. The litigation continues.
And they make a further case: that Fox News’ embrace of a Trumpian conservatism endangers their news outlets’ reputation for journalism.
Last year, Rupert and Lachlan agreed Fox Corp. would pay a record $787.5 million to settle a defamation suit brought by Dominion Voting Systems against Fox News over false claims of fraud in the 2020 elections. Evidence that became public included emails in which the father and son gave their blessing to network executives’ decision to indulge former President Donald Trump’s lies to avoid alienating viewers.
Lachlan Murdoch and his team ousted prime time star Tucker Carlson shortly after as part of an effort to distance itself from that period. Carlson’s replacement, Jesse Watters, has drawn strong ratings.
Rupert Murdoch officially stepped away from active control of his companies last year, a few months after the settlement. He has told associates his actions were only to ensure clarity of corporate strategy and an embrace of what works.
In Reno, the probate commissioner, Edmund J. Gorman Jr., concluded that Rupert Murdoch had the right to revise the trust if it worked to the benefit of all of his heirs. Gorman must decide whether the media magnate has made a good-faith argument that that is what his proposed changes are intended to do.
Past suggestions of settlements have fallen apart. It would be financially difficult for Lachlan to buy out his siblings. And the others, should they hold onto their voting stakes, may choose to sell off properties rather than retain them for Lachlan to run. Presumably, after Lachlan joins Rupert Murdoch in seeking to take away their influence, the other three children might choose to unseat him as corporate chief and replace him with someone else.
