#Prudence Murdoch

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Lauren Aratani at The Guardian:

Rupert Murdoch’s three adult children will retain control over their father’s media empire upon his death, a Nevada court has ruled after Murdoch launched a campaign to wrest away their power and give it all to his oldest son. The New York Times reported on Murdoch’s loss, citing a sealed court decision that was filed on Saturday. The family battle took place outside of the public’s eye, despite attempts from the media to gain access to the trial. Murdoch took three of his adult children, James, Elisabeth and Prudence, to court as he tried to completely remove their voting power over the trust Murdoch set up. The current trust structure gives all four adult children equal voting power over Murdoch’s empire, which includes Fox News and News Corp, but Murdoch wanted to give Lachlan, his oldest son and most likeminded child, complete control over the media companies. The change would have only impacted the voting power of the siblings, not their financial inheritance.

After reviewing the case, the Nevada commissioner Edmund Gorman concluded that Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch had acted in “bad faith” in their attempts to change the terms of an irrevocable trust that divides control of the company between Murdoch’s four oldest children. In a statement, James, Elisabeth and Prudence told the Times: “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.”

The 96-page opinion lambasts the media mogul, according to the Times, accusing him of organizing a “carefully crafted charade” to “permanently cement Lachlan Murdoch’s executive roles” inside the empire “regardless of the impacts such control would have over the companies or the beneficiaries” of the family trust.

[...] Murdoch, 93, is more politically aligned with Lachlan, his heir apparent. James, Elisabeth and Prudence are regarded as less conservative and James, in particular, has publicly criticized climate denialism in the media and accused US media of “propagating lies” that unleashed “insidious and uncontrollable forces” after the January 6 insurrection. James resigned from his role as a senior executive at News Corp in 2020. That same year, he and his wife donated $600,000 to Joe Biden’s presidential campaign. Meanwhile, Lachlan, who took over as chair of News Corp in 2023, has privately voiced political opinions similar to his father and has attached himself to the growth in ratings and sales the media empire has seen since Trump’s rise in 2015, according to multiple reports.

Right-wing media titan Rupert Murdoch lost his bid to control the line of succession to his media empire when he passes away, as his three adult children-- James, Elisabeth, and Prudence-- all of whom are far less simpatico with the right-wing politics of Rupert and Lachlan, will retain voting control of it.

Rupert wanted to completely hand voting rights control to his oldest and most like-minded child Lachlan.

[wipbigbang]

WIP Big Bang 2023 Round Starting April 1st!

What is the WIP Big Bang? Good question! This is a Big Bang with one goal in mind: to clean out your fanfic drafts folder. These are stories that were unfinished for whatever reason, that authors returned to and completed, and the art that goes with them!

Please read our FAQ/check out our schedule for more details.

[flock-of-cassowaries]

They miss Succession so much they’re re-enacting it! LARP-style!

oh y’all have GOT to read this article

[akajustmerry]

What is the latest Murdoch Succession drama?

hehe soooooooo earlier this year decrepit shit Rupert Murdoch put his eldest son right wing piss head Lachlan as CEO. howeverrrrr, years ago old Rupert drew up a trust that ensured his four main children ie the ones he gives a shit about (Lachlan, Prudence, James and Elizabeth) had equal voting and veto power on the board. Making eldest piss head Lachlan CEO violates that trust. so they all went to court over it, basically other 3 offspring versus Lachlan and Rupert. Rupert and Lachlan allegedly tried to change the trust so that the siblings couldn't veto anything but the judge ruled the attempt to change it was in "bad faith" and ruled in favour of the siblings. We don't know exactly what happened because the whole thing is sealed, but this was in the media statements released by the lawyers. I just think it's really beautiful when Rupert Murdoch loses, especially when he loses because of a piece of paper he himself wrote. it's too funny to me!!!

[laiqualaurelote]

Hellooo! Paranormal investigator AU for Phrack, maybe? Thank you!!

thank you for the prompt! (from this AU ask game) This is a fun one. Though one could easily set it in the modern day, I would still set it in the 1920s, because that was such a fascinating time in terms of the spiritual and supernatural - you've got the Spiritualism revival that the show briefly explores in Death Comes Knocking, the rise of silent horror films like The Cabinet of Dr Caligari and Nosferatu, and the moral panic association between jazz and vampires, which is how you get the Jazz Age Vamp (taken literally in the Rivers of London second novel Moon Over Soho, which has vampires that feed on jazz).

Phryne is one such Jazz Age Vamp (not literally; she is perfectly human). She solves supernatural cases because she remains haunted by her sister's murder at the hands of necromancer Murdoch Foyle, which she has never been able to get him convicted for (it is very difficult to prove necromancy in a court of law). She is descended from a long line of witches on her mother's side. This means that Aunt Prudence is in fact a witch of considerable strength, but chooses to use none of it because Magic is Not Proper. As they have no female descendants, they adopt Jane into their line so she will inherit the power.

Jack is the detective inspector who keeps getting assigned all the cases with a whiff of the supernatural because nobody else wants to handle them. He has inadvertently become the 1920s Melbourne equivalent of the Folly (if you know Rivers of London). This is despite the fact that he is deeply skeptical by nature - had one too many run-ins with scam artists pretending to be mediums (the hypnotist whom Jane is forced to steal for is one such conman) - and is convinced that Miss Fisher is a fraud. After reluctantly solving multiple cases with her, he concedes ghosts are real but remains immensely annoyed about it.

Dot is a real medium who struggles to reconcile her gift with her Catholic faith. She falls in love with Hugh after being forced to exorcise him, because he is exactly the kind of idiot who would end up getting possessed on his first case.

Mac still works at the morgue, which is full of ghosts. She can see them but mostly ignores them ("are you trying to sabotage your own autopsy, madam? no? then go cry in the corner till I'm done. Thank you.")

Bert came back from the war. Cec did not. This has not stopped them from driving a cab together. Their cab can take you to any part of Melbourne, including the city of the dead. They are still Communists. They take the "spectre haunting" aspect of it very seriously.

Mr Butler has been working at Wardlow for the past century and plans to continue doing so indefinitely. Nobody knows if he is alive, dead, or undead; moreover they feel it is impolite to ask.

Every case in this AU has a supernatural element except Death Comes Knocking, wherein it is revealed that every single person involved is scamming everyone else.

Arthur Conan Doyle makes a cameo in Away With the Fairies. Harry Houdini makes a cameo in Death Defying Feats and spends most of it trashing Doyle's views on spiritualism.

Crypt of Tears is greatly improved by the crypt being full of actual undead.

[collapsedsquid]

When Murdoch dies, his six children will each inherit a portion of the economic ownership of that stock. Right now four of those children stand to inherit equal voting rights over the trust, and they seem to be at odds with each other about the company’s business strategy and journalistic standards. This arguably undermines the purpose of the super-voting stock: You might want one person to have control of the company, insulated from conflicting pressures, to “promote stability.” Murdoch might want the economic ownership (of his 14% ownership stake) to be divided among his children, but he might want the voting control (of his 41% voting stake) to be concentrated in one of them. And so the solution is dual-class stock on top of dual-class stock: Give one Murdoch child (Lachlan) super-voting control over the trust that has super-voting control over News Corp. and Fox Corp

Rupert Murdoch, 93 years old, is seeking to amend his trust—which holds big stakes in Fox News owner Fox Corp. and Wall Street Journal parent News Corp—to ensure that when he dies Lachlan will control the family holdings spanning cable news, sports media, streaming, newspapers, book publishing and real estate. James Murdoch is resisting the change, and these days he has Elisabeth and Prudence on his side.  A trial to settle the dispute is set to begin Monday in a probate court in Nevada, where the trust is based. It will be closed to the public unless pending legal challenges to open up the proceedings are successful.

Pshaw courts, younger Murdoch children you need to raise your troops, march on your father and demand your rightful inheritance at swordpoint

[tomorrowusa]

Biden’s superpower is that he keeps getting opponents to underestimate him.

He called Putin’s bluff in Ukraine. And even before the invasion began the White House allowed the declassification of intelligence which revealed Russian plans to stage a fake incident (like the 1939 Gleiwitz incident) to justify Putin’s invasion.

Republicans went into the debt ceiling negotiations believing too much of their own propaganda about Biden. in the end, close to nobody is concluding that Speaker Kevin McCarthy came out ahead on this deal.  

Edward Luce wrote at The Financial Times (archived)...

Rarely in the history of fiscal brinkmanship has so much noise been made by so many Republicans with so little to show for it. The result is a win for Biden that prudence stops him from celebrating.

[ ... ]

McCarthy, along with many others, serially underestimates Biden. In spite of being owned by the nonagenarian Rupert Murdoch, Fox News and its imitators are obsessed with the octogenarian Biden’s alleged senility. “Republicans got outsmarted by a president who can’t find his pants,” tweeted Nancy Mace, a Republican lawmaker who said she will vote against the deal.

In practice, Biden played the game of chicken well. He took it seriously by flying home early from his Asian trip in mid-May. In the interests of stopping a default, he resisted the temptation to call his opponents pyromaniacs. Biden’s age and limited energy may even have helped. It is useful to have a calm temperament in the midst of a crisis.

In an age of superhero action films, having a calm and measured temperament is often overlooked as an advantage.

[ao3feed-mfmm]

And a Promise to Look Before You

read it on the AO3 at https://ift.tt/EjQfPTq

by aurora_australis

Believing that history could be changed for the better, and theorising that one could time travel within their own lifetime, in 1958 The Honourable Phryne Fisher stepped into the Quantum Leap accelerator, and vanished.

And she wasn’t alone.

Words: 3243, Chapters: 1/?, Language: English

Fandoms: Miss Fisher's Murder Mysteries (TV)

Rating: Mature

Warnings: No Archive Warnings Apply

Categories: F/M

Characters: Phryne Fisher, Jack Robinson, Dorothy "Dot" Williams, Hugh Collins, Prudence Stanley, Elizabeth MacMillan, Tobias Butler, Murdoch Foyle

Relationships: Phryne Fisher/Jack Robinson

Additional Tags: Time Travel, Alternate Universe - Time Travel, The Loosest of Loose Quantum Leap AUs

read it on the AO3 at https://ift.tt/EjQfPTq

[thoughtlessarse]

Rupert Murdoch has failed in his attempt to give his eldest son control of his media empire, according to US reports. The case pitted the 93-year-old against three of his children over who would gain the power to control News Corp and Fox News when he dies. It has been reported that Murdoch wanted to amend a family trust created in 1999 to allow his son Lachlan to take control without “interference” from his siblings Prudence, Elisabeth and James. A Nevada commissioner ruled Mr Murdoch and Lachlan had acted in “bad faith” and called the efforts a “carefully crafted charade”, according to the New York Times. The conflict over the family trust is not thought to be centred around money, as Murdoch is not seeking to diminish any of his children’s financial inheritance. Instead, the move would have changed the voting power of his less conservative children and is thought to have cemented a right-wing agenda across his media empire.

continue reading

[trendingnews19]

An attempt by Rupert Murdoch to change who controls the future of his media empire has been blocked, according to US media reports.A legal judgment accuses the 93-year-old of acting in "bad faith" by attempting to amend his family trust to benefit his eldest son, Lachlan. Currently, the trust passes control of the company equally among Mr Murdoch's four oldest children - Lachlan, James, Elisabeth and Prudence - after his death.But Nevada commissioner Edmund Gorman rejected a bid to change the terms of the trust following a lengthy hearing.Lachlan is head of Fox News parent Fox Corp and News Corp, which owns UK titles including The Sun and The Times. Mr Murdoch's proposed amendment would have blocked any interference by three of Lachlan's siblings, who are more politically moderate. Get set for more family infighting This is a storyline which could be straight out of the TV drama Succession, which many already suspected was heavily based on the Murdoch family. Rupert Murdoch, who is now 93, had been engaged in a lengthy court battle to try to hand over control of his media empire to his eldest son Lachlan when he dies. Lachlan, who is more politically conservative than his siblings, would in theory consolidate the right-wing stance of some parts of Murdoch's media empire - especially Fox News. Today a document obtained by the New York Times revealed the commissioner in the case has whole-heartedly rejected the plan to change his trust, calling it a "bad faith" deal from Murdoch and his eldest son. By bringing this case, Rupert Murdoch has made patently and painfully clear which of his children he favours. There is some fascinating detail of art imitating life as the court heard how Mr Murdoch's children had started secretly discussing a strategy for their father's death. They were prompted by an episode of Succession where media tycoon Logan Roy dies, throwing his family and empire into chaos. The reality is that there will no doubt be more family infighting, as Rupert Murdoch's lawyers say he is likely to appeal the judgment. Mr Gorman said the plan to change the trust was a "carefully crafted charade", according to The New York Times which first revealed details of the ruling. The newspaper also described that, in the commissioner's opinion, it was an attempt to "permanently cement Lachlan Murdoch's executive roles" inside the empire "regardless of the impacts such control would have over the companies or the beneficiaries" of the family trust. Image: Rupert Murdoch (centre) poses with his sons Lachlan (left) and James (right) in 2016. Pic: Reuters Potentially, three of the heirs could out-vote a fourth, setting up a battle over the future of the companies. "The effort was an attempt to stack the deck in Lachlan Murdoch's favor after Rupert Murdoch's passing so that his succession would be immutable", the commissioner ruled."The play might have worked; but an evidentiary hearing, like a showdown in a game of poker, is where gamesmanship collides with the facts and at its conclusion, all the bluffs are called and the cards lie face up."A spokesman for Mr Murdoch could not immediately be reached for comment. Read more from Sky News:Bankers to scrutinise public sector spendingFind out what is the 'Boxing Day bounce'But his lawyer, Adam Streisand, said they were disappointed with the ruling and intended to appeal, The New York Times reported.A spokesperson for Prudence, Elisabeth and James Murdoch said in an emailed statement to The Associated Press that they welcome the ruling and hope that their family can "move beyond this litigation to focus on strengthening and rebuilding relationships among all family members."Sky News, which Mr Murdoch launched in the UK in 1989, is no longer part of his empire.At the end of 2018, Fox's film entertainment assets, such as The Simpsons and the Avatar film franchise, were sold to Disney - while the company's 39% stake in Sky was sold to Comcast. atOptions = 'key' : '6c396458fda3ada2fbfcbb375349ce34', 'format' : 'iframe', 'height' : 60, 'width' : 468, 'params' : ;

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Lauren Aratani at The Observer:

An elderly billionaire goes to war with his adult children over the future of his media empire. His only ally is his eldest son, crowned leader of his father’s enterprise after years of jostling with his siblings. In choosing a successor, the patriarch spurns three of his other children, who remain threats: when he dies, they will each have just as much power as the eldest son to shape his companies, potentially against the rightwing ideologies that have guided them for decades.

Away from the public eye, he makes a dramatic move. To deliver control to his eldest son, the mogul quietly launches an extraordinary bid to alter the trust set to hand the other three influence upon his death. But they stand ready to fight. This may sound akin to HBO’s Succession, but it’s life imitating art – which was, in turn, imitating life. Rupert Murdoch, 93, the billionaire owner of News Corp and Fox Corporation who helped inspire the show, is trying to give his eldest son, Lachlan, full control of his media outlets upon his death. While his other adult children – James, Elisabeth and Prudence – will still receive equal shares of company profits, this would leave them with no say over the companies upon his death.

This battle is in fact bigger than anything featured on Succession, according to Robert Thompson, a media scholar based at Syracuse University. “This is arguably the single most influential media outlet in all of the English-speaking world,” he said of News Corp and Fox. “How this turns out has a real, significant impact on real people living on planet Earth.” News Corp owns more than a hundred major and local newspapers, including the Wall Street Journal and the New York Post in the US, as well as the Times and the Sun in the UK. Meanwhile, Fox is the parent of Fox News, the leading conservative cable network in the US, with millions of viewers.

The Murdochs’ legal fight played out in secret for months – until Wednesday, when it burst into the open. The New York Times reported on a decision from a Nevada probate commissioner, which is under seal, that Murdoch can rewrite his family’s irrevocable trust if he can prove the change is being made in good faith and benefits his heirs. The ruling sets the stage for a high-profile trial over the future of his vast array of media interests, with Murdoch and his three children slated to duke it out in court in September.

Both sides, according to the Times, have bulked up on high-profile lawyers. William Barr, the former US attorney general, is helping Murdoch rewrite the trust, and he has also hired Adam Streisand, a trial lawyer who previously worked on estate cases involving Michael Jackson and Britney Spears. The feuding appears to have taken its toll on the family. When Rupert married his fifth wife in California last month, Lachlan was said to have been the only one of his four eldest children in attendance. The other two also reportedly steered clear.

With Lachlan as his father’s successor, Fox News and News Corp will continue to be a conservative force. But under the trust’s current structure, the three other siblings, who are deemed more politically moderate, can push back. Murdoch is seemingly keen to avoid this prospect. Conservatism has been the backbone of his empire since its inception. It has proved to be remarkably profitable.

Though Murdoch had successfully formed relationships with powerful conservative figures in Australia and the UK, it was not until Donald Trump’s ascendancy that he had close ties to the White House. Though Fox was initially dismissive of Trump, the network soon turned into his most powerful megaphone. In turn, Murdoch had direct access to a commander-in-chief. Not all of Murdoch’s children were happy about this. During Trump’s presidency, Elisabeth, Prudence and James started to drift away from their father’s politics.

When Roger Ailes, the longtime Fox CEO, left the company in 2016 off the back of multiple sexual harassment allegations, James reportedly believed he could push the network in a new direction, bringing in an experienced executive who was less of an ideologue. Instead, the elder Murdoch took over as chair himself.

In the summer of 2020, James – once a senior executive at News Corp – announced he was resigning from the board over “disagreements over certain editorial content”. He and his wife, Kathryn, were particularly vocal about the climate crisis and seemed to resent Fox News and News Corp’s climate denialism. “We’ve been arguing about politics since I was a teenager,” James told the Times in 2020, about his father. In 2020, James and his wife donated more than $600,000 to Biden’s campaign. Murdoch eventually crowned Lachlan as his successor. While Lachlan does not speak publicly about his personal political views, reports have said they usually lean more conservative than his father’s. And while Lachlan appears less interested than his father in political influence, he cares about profit. And Trump has been profitable.

The Observer (the Sunday version of The Guardian) has an illuminating piece on the Murdoch media empire, and how Rupert Murdoch is going to war over who gets to succeed him upon his death by rewriting the trust to benefit stridently right-wing Lachlan at the expense of the other three (and less right-wing) children.

[nadeempardesi]

An attempt by Rupert Murdoch to change who controls the future of his media empire has been blocked, according to US media reports.A legal judgment accuses the 93-year-old of acting in "bad faith" by attempting to amend his family trust to benefit his eldest son, Lachlan. Currently, the trust passes control of the company equally among Mr Murdoch's four oldest children - Lachlan, James, Elisabeth and Prudence - after his death.But Nevada commissioner Edmund Gorman rejected a bid to change the terms of the trust following a lengthy hearing.Lachlan is head of Fox News parent Fox Corp and News Corp, which owns UK titles including The Sun and The Times. Mr Murdoch's proposed amendment would have blocked any interference by three of Lachlan's siblings, who are more politically moderate. Get set for more family infighting This is a storyline which could be straight out of the TV drama Succession, which many already suspected was heavily based on the Murdoch family. Rupert Murdoch, who is now 93, had been engaged in a lengthy court battle to try to hand over control of his media empire to his eldest son Lachlan when he dies. Lachlan, who is more politically conservative than his siblings, would in theory consolidate the right-wing stance of some parts of Murdoch's media empire - especially Fox News. Today a document obtained by the New York Times revealed the commissioner in the case has whole-heartedly rejected the plan to change his trust, calling it a "bad faith" deal from Murdoch and his eldest son. By bringing this case, Rupert Murdoch has made patently and painfully clear which of his children he favours. There is some fascinating detail of art imitating life as the court heard how Mr Murdoch's children had started secretly discussing a strategy for their father's death. They were prompted by an episode of Succession where media tycoon Logan Roy dies, throwing his family and empire into chaos. The reality is that there will no doubt be more family infighting, as Rupert Murdoch's lawyers say he is likely to appeal the judgment. Mr Gorman said the plan to change the trust was a "carefully crafted charade", according to The New York Times which first revealed details of the ruling. The newspaper also described that, in the commissioner's opinion, it was an attempt to "permanently cement Lachlan Murdoch's executive roles" inside the empire "regardless of the impacts such control would have over the companies or the beneficiaries" of the family trust. Image: Rupert Murdoch (centre) poses with his sons Lachlan (left) and James (right) in 2016. Pic: Reuters Potentially, three of the heirs could out-vote a fourth, setting up a battle over the future of the companies. "The effort was an attempt to stack the deck in Lachlan Murdoch's favor after Rupert Murdoch's passing so that his succession would be immutable", the commissioner ruled."The play might have worked; but an evidentiary hearing, like a showdown in a game of poker, is where gamesmanship collides with the facts and at its conclusion, all the bluffs are called and the cards lie face up."A spokesman for Mr Murdoch could not immediately be reached for comment. Read more from Sky News:Bankers to scrutinise public sector spendingFind out what is the 'Boxing Day bounce'But his lawyer, Adam Streisand, said they were disappointed with the ruling and intended to appeal, The New York Times reported.A spokesperson for Prudence, Elisabeth and James Murdoch said in an emailed statement to The Associated Press that they welcome the ruling and hope that their family can "move beyond this litigation to focus on strengthening and rebuilding relationships among all family members."Sky News, which Mr Murdoch launched in the UK in 1989, is no longer part of his empire.At the end of 2018, Fox's film entertainment assets, such as The Simpsons and the Avatar film franchise, were sold to Disney - while the company's 39% stake in Sky was sold to Comcast. rupert-murdoch-loses-legal-battle-to-wrestle-control-of-his-media-empire-money-news

[boome11]

A real-life "Succession" battle for Rupert Murdoch's media empire has ended with a Nevada court commissioner denying the billionaire's bid to change a family trust and give control to his eldest son.The case pitted the 93-year-old against three of his children over who would gain the power to control News Corp and Fox News when he dies.It has been reported that Mr Murdoch wanted to amend a family trust created in 1999 to allow his son Lachlan to take control without "interference" from his siblings Prudence, Elisabeth and James. A Nevada commissioner ruled Mr Murdoch and Lachlan had acted in "bad faith" and called the efforts a "carefully crafted charade", according to the New York Times.In a statement, a spokesperson for Prudence, Elisabeth and James 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."Adam Streisand, a lawyer for Mr Murdoch, told the New York Times they were disappointed and planned to appeal.The BBC has contacted Mr Streisand for comment.The famous family was one of the inspirations behind the hugely popular TV series Succession - something the Murdochs have always refused to comment on.But according to the New York Times report, which is based on a copy of the sealed court ruling, the billionaire's children had started discussing their father's death and how they would handle it after an episode of the HBO series where "the patriarch of the family dies, leaving his family and business in chaos".The episode led to Elisabeth's representative to the trust writing a "'Succession' memo" that sought to prevent this from happening in real life, said reports.Mr Murdoch, who has been married five times, also has two younger children, Grace and Chloe, who do not have any voting rights under the trust agreement.The case was launched after Mr Murdoch decided to change the trust over worries about a "lack of consensus" among the children, the Times reported. Lachan is thought to be more conservative than his siblings and would preserve the legacy of his media brands.From the 1960s, Mr Murdoch built a global media giant with major political and public influence.His two companies are News Corporation, which owns newspapers including the Times and the Sun in the UK and the Wall Street Journal in the US, and Fox, which broadcasts Fox News.Mr Murdoch had been preparing his two sons to follow in his footsteps, beginning when they were teenagers, journalist Andrew Neil told the 2020 BBC documentary The Rise of the Murdoch Dynasty."Family has always been very important to Rupert Murdoch, particularly from the point of view of forming a dynasty," the former Sunday Times editor said.In 1999, the Murdoch Family Trust, which owns the media companies, was supposed to largely settle the succession plans.It led to Mr Murdoch giving his eldest children various jobs within his companies.The trust gives the family eight votes, which it can use to have a say on the board of News Corp and Fox News.Mr Murdoch currently controls four of those votes, with his eldest children being in charge of one each.The trust agreement said that once Mr Murdoch died, his votes would be passed on to his four eldest children equally.However, differences in opinions and political views were said to lead to a family rift.The battle over changes to the trust were not about money, but rather power and control over the future of the Murdoch empire. The commissioner's ruling is not final, the Times reports. The court filing acts as a recommended resolution but a district judge will still weigh in and could choose to rule differently. Additional reporting by Michelle Fleury and Charlotte Edwards https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/1024/branded_news/af43/live/59b1e620-b673-11ef-8df6-690844e40243.jpg 2024-12-09 23:46:58

[newsclickofficial]

A real-life "Succession" battle for Rupert Murdoch's media empire has ended with a Nevada court commissioner denying the billionaire's bid to change a family trust and give control to his eldest son.The case pitted the 93-year-old against three of his children over who would gain the power to control News Corp and Fox News when he dies.It has been reported that Mr Murdoch wanted to amend a family trust created in 1999 to allow his son Lachlan could take control without "interference" from his siblings Prudence, Elisabeth and James. A Nevada commissioner ruled Mr Murdoch and Lachlan had acted in "bad faith" and called the efforts a "carefully crafted charade", according to the New York Times.In a statement, a spokesperson for Prudence, Elisabeth and James, 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."Adam Streisand, a lawyer for Mr Murdoch, told the New York Times they were disappointed and planned to appeal.The BBC has contacted Mr Streisand for comment.The famous family was one of the inspirations behind the hugely popular TV series Succession - something the Murdochs have always refused to comment on.But, according to the New York Times report, which is based on a copy of the sealed court ruling, the billionaire's children had started discussing their father's death and how they would handle it after an episode of the HBO series where "the patriarch of the family dies, leaving his family and business in chaos".The episode led to Elisabeth's representative to the trust writing a "'Succession' memo" that sought to prevent this from happening in real life, said reports.Mr Murdoch, who has been married five times, also has two younger children, Grace and Chloe, who do not have any voting rights under the trust agreement.The case was launched after Mr Murdoch decided to change the trust over worries about a "lack of consensus" among the children, the Times reported. Lachan is thought to be more conservative than his siblings and would preserve the legacy of his media brands.From the 1960s, Mr Murdoch built up his media empire into a globe-spanning media giant with major political and public influence.His two companies are News Corporation, which owns newspapers including the Times and the Sun in the UK and the Wall Street Journal in the US, and Fox, which broadcasts Fox News.Mr Murdoch had been preparing his two sons to follow in his footsteps, beginning when they were teens, journalist Andrew Neil told the 2020 BBC documentary The Rise of the Murdoch Dynasty."Family has always been very important to Rupert Murdoch, particularly from the point of view of forming a dynasty," the former Sunday Times editor said.In 1999, the Murdoch Family Trust, which owns the media companies, was supposed to largely settle the succession plans.It led to Mr Murdoch giving his eldest children various jobs within his companies.The trust gives the family eight votes, which it can use to have a say on the board of News Corp and Fox News.Mr Murdoch currently controls four of those votes, with his eldest children being in charge of one each.The trust agreement said that once Mr Murdoch died, his votes would be passed on to his four eldest children equally.However, differences in opinions and political views were said to lead to a family rift.The battle over changes to the trust were not about money, but rather power and control over the future of the Murdoch empire. The commissioner's ruling is not final, the Times reports. The court filing acts as a recommended resolution but a district judge will still weigh in and could choose to rule differently. Additional reporting by Michelle Fleury and Charlotte Edwards

[globalnews1]

A real-life "Succession" battle for Rupert Murdoch's media empire has ended with a Nevada court commissioner denying the billionaire's bid to change a family trust and give control to his eldest son.The case pitted the 93-year-old against three of his children over who would gain the power to control News Corp and Fox News when he dies.It has been reported that Mr Murdoch wanted to amend a family trust created in 1999 to allow his son Lachlan could take control without "interference" from his siblings Prudence, Elisabeth and James. A Nevada commissioner ruled Mr Murdoch and Lachlan had acted in "bad faith" and called the efforts a "carefully crafted charade", according to the New York Times.In a statement, a spokesperson for Prudence, Elisabeth and James, 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."Adam Streisand, a lawyer for Mr Murdoch, told the New York Times they were disappointed and planned to appeal.The BBC has contacted Mr Streisand for comment.The famous family was one of the inspirations behind the hugely popular TV series Succession - something the Murdochs have always refused to comment on.But, according to the New York Times report, which is based on a copy of the sealed court ruling, the billionaire's children had started discussing their father's death and how they would handle it after an episode of the HBO series where "the patriarch of the family dies, leaving his family and business in chaos".The episode led to Elisabeth's representative to the trust writing a "'Succession' memo" that sought to prevent this from happening in real life, said reports.Mr Murdoch, who has been married five times, also has two younger children, Grace and Chloe, who do not have any voting rights under the trust agreement.The case was launched after Mr Murdoch decided to change the trust over worries about a "lack of consensus" among the children, the Times reported. Lachan is thought to be more conservative than his siblings and would preserve the legacy of his media brands.From the 1960s, Mr Murdoch built up his media empire into a globe-spanning media giant with major political and public influence.His two companies are News Corporation, which owns newspapers including the Times and the Sun in the UK and the Wall Street Journal in the US, and Fox, which broadcasts Fox News.Mr Murdoch had been preparing his two sons to follow in his footsteps, beginning when they were teens, journalist Andrew Neil told the 2020 BBC documentary The Rise of the Murdoch Dynasty."Family has always been very important to Rupert Murdoch, particularly from the point of view of forming a dynasty," the former Sunday Times editor said.In 1999, the Murdoch Family Trust, which owns the media companies, was supposed to largely settle the succession plans.It led to Mr Murdoch giving his eldest children various jobs within his companies.The trust gives the family eight votes, which it can use to have a say on the board of News Corp and Fox News.Mr Murdoch currently controls four of those votes, with his eldest children being in charge of one each.The trust agreement said that once Mr Murdoch died, his votes would be passed on to his four eldest children equally.However, differences in opinions and political views were said to lead to a family rift.The battle over changes to the trust were not about money, but rather power and control over the future of the Murdoch empire. The commissioner's ruling is not final, the Times reports. The court filing acts as a recommended resolution but a district judge will still weigh in and could choose to rule differently. Additional reporting by Michelle Fleury and Charlotte Edwards