A Nevada probate commissioner has rejected Rupert Murdoch’s attempt to amend his family trust, which would have granted his son, Lachlan Murdoch, greater control over their media empire, including Fox News. The decision, reported by The New York Times, highlighted that Murdoch and his son acted in “bad faith” in their efforts to modify the irrevocable trust.
Equal Control Among Murdoch Siblings
The trust, established by the 93-year-old media mogul, equally divides control of the family businesses among his four children: Prudence, Elisabeth, Lachlan, and James. Rupert Murdoch argued the amendment was necessary to preserve the conservative editorial direction of Fox News, a core value of the empire. Lachlan Murdoch has led Fox News and News Corp since Rupert stepped down last year, but his siblings, particularly James and Elisabeth, hold less conservative views, potentially threatening the continuity of the network’s political stance.
Commissioner Labels Plan a “Charade”
Probate Commissioner Edmund J. Gorman Jr., in his 96-page opinion, described the plan to amend the trust as a “carefully crafted charade” designed to secure Lachlan’s executive roles and influence. The court ruled the effort would unfairly tip the balance of power in Lachlan’s favor, undermining the trust’s intent.
“The court sees the cards for what they are and concludes this raw deal will not prevail,” Gorman stated.
Murdoch’s Next Steps
Murdoch’s lawyer, Adam Streisand, expressed disappointment with the ruling, confirming plans to appeal. Meanwhile, a spokesperson for Prudence, Elisabeth, and James Murdoch welcomed the decision, emphasizing the importance of focusing on familial relationships.
Implications for Fox News’ Future
This ruling raises questions about the future direction of Fox News and its editorial stance. While Lachlan’s leadership may maintain the network’s conservative approach, the equal distribution of power among the siblings could lead to significant shifts in the company’s strategy post-Rupert Murdoch.
As the Murdoch family navigates these challenges, the decision underscores the complexities of balancing family dynamics with business interests in a global media empire.
For more detailed insights into the ruling, visit The New York Times.
Note: Every piece of content is rigorously reviewed by our team of experienced writers and editors to ensure its accuracy. Our writers use credible sources and adhere to strict fact-checking protocols to verify all claims and data before publication. If an error is identified, we promptly correct it and strive for transparency in all updates.
