A Nevada court commissioner denied Rupert Murdoch’s attempt to change his family’s trust to give his eldest son, Lachlan, control of his media empire. The dispute involved Murdoch, 93, and three of his children—Prudence, Elisabeth, and James—over who would control News Corp and Fox News after his death.
Murdoch sought to amend the 1999 trust, aiming to exclude interference from his other children. The Nevada court ruled Murdoch and Lachlan acted in “bad faith,” calling the move a “carefully crafted charade,” according to The New York Times.
Family Dynamics and the Trust Battle
- The Trust: Created in 1999, it divides voting power equally among Murdoch’s four eldest children after his death. Currently, Murdoch holds four of the trust’s eight votes.
- Motivation: The dispute centers on control, not money. Lachlan, seen as more conservative, is favored to uphold Murdoch’s media legacy.
- Opposition: Prudence, Elisabeth, and James resisted the change, citing concerns about power dynamics.
Court Proceedings
The case, conducted in Nevada due to the state’s confidentiality laws, highlighted deep rifts within the family. The decision isn’t final, as a district judge will review it and could overturn the commissioner’s ruling.
Real-Life Parallels to Succession
The HBO series Succession, partially inspired by the Murdochs, influenced this legal drama. After a pivotal episode discussing a patriarch’s death, Elisabeth proposed measures to avoid similar chaos.
Future Implications
Murdoch’s empire includes News Corp (owner of The Times, The Sun, and The Wall Street Journal) and Fox News. The unresolved succession plan raises questions about the future of these influential companies.
What do you think about this high-stakes family battle? Share your thoughts below.
