A momentous court battle over the fate of Rupert Murdoch’s media empire gets under way in Nevada today.
At stake is the future of a string of newspapers and television channels consumed by millions of people around the world, as well as thousands of jobs – and billions of pounds.
The media mogul, who turned 93 this year, has spent decades building up his news brands, making them some of the most powerful and influential in the Western world.
But now, as he nears the end of his life, a rift has opened up in his family – and raised questions about what kind of legacy he will leave behind.
The case will decide who controls Murdoch’s family trust after he is gone and which of his children will have major voting rights in his companies. And it could result in the billionaire’s heir apparent Lachlan Murdoch being out-manoeuvred by some of his less conservative siblings.
Image: Rupert Murdoch and his wife Elena Zhukova. Pic: News Corp
What are his family members fighting over?
The row centres around future power and influence over Mr Murdoch‘s two companies – News Corp and Fox.
News Corp owns newspapers including The Wall Street Journal and the New York Post in the US, The Australian, The Herald Sun and The Daily Telegraph in Australia, and The Sun, The Times and The Sunday Times in the UK.
Also under News Corp’s wing is publishing giant HarperCollins, along with several Australian TV channels.
Advertisement
Meanwhile, Fox News, Fox Sports and streaming service Tubi form part of his other major company.
Mr Murdoch has a roughly 40% stake in voting shares of each company.
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.
Image: Lachlan Murdoch and his wife Sarah in February 2020. Pic: Reuters
Who is involved in the case and why?
Sorting out Mr Murdoch’s inheritance was never going to be easy – he has six children and has been married five times, most recently to retired molecular biologist Elena Zhukova.
However, it had long been presumed that his business succession plans were largely settled in 1999, following his divorce from his second wife Anna.
That year the Murdoch Family Trust was founded – establishing the principle that, when he died, his News Corp and Fox’s voting shares would be divided between his four oldest children – Prudence, Elisabeth, Lachlan and James.
Following the “irrevocable” agreement, Mr Murdoch began integrating some of his children into roles at his companies.
However, following a shift in relations with some of his offspring, it emerged earlier this year that the media mogul had changed his mind.
The New York Times revealed that Mr Murdoch had decided he wanted to change the terms of the trust, to ensure his eldest son Lachlan would go on to run his businesses without “interference” from his other siblings.
The newspaper reported that James, Elisabeth and Prudence “were caught completely off-guard” by the move and had decided to unite to stop him.
Lachlan has reportedly taken his father’s side in the case.
Image: James Murdoch with his wife Kathryn Hufschmid at the Oscars earlier this year. Pic: Reuters
Why did Murdoch change his mind?
The billionaire’s efforts to tweak the terms of the family trust come amid signs that he has increasingly favoured Lachlan as his chosen heir in recent years.
When Mr Murdoch revealed last year he was stepping down as chairof Fox and News Corp, it was announced that his eldest son would become the sole chair of News Corp – while also continuing as executive chair and chief executive of Fox.
The main reason, it is thought, is politics. Lachlan is seen as more similar and aligned with his father’s right-wing views, while James, Elisabeth and Prudence are seen as more moderate in their beliefs.
Indeed, the media mogul’s decision to give Lachlan “permanent, exclusive control” came amid worries over the “lack of consensus” among his children about the future of the Murdoch brands, according to court documents seen by The New York Times.
Image: Elisabeth Murdoch, pictured in 2009. Pic: AP
James has been openly critical of Fox News – and recently endorsed Democrat Kamala Harris for president – while his sister Elisabeth has also “privately expressed discomfort about being associated with Fox News”, according to the Wall Street Journal.
The newspaper, which is owned by Mr Murdoch, also reported that “putting more power in Lachlan’s hands is meant to ensure stability at the businesses and avoid a confusing ownership structure in coming years”.
It quoted sources who said Mr Murdoch had been “dismayed that James and his wife seemed to be embarrassed by Fox yet were happy to enjoy the fruits of its financial success”, with the two not said to be on speaking terms.
Image: Mr Murdoch turned 93 earlier this year. Pic: PA
So what’s going to happen?
Despite the family rift, there is one thing the Murdochs involved agree on – they do not want their media rivals to feast on their fallout.
Consequently, the hearing to settle the dispute is being held in private – despite attempts from news agencies to grant public access – behind closed doors at the Washoe County Courthouse in Reno, Nevada, with probate commissioner Edmund J Gorman Jr due to rule on the case.
An earlier hearing concluded that Mr Murdoch could change the terms of the trust – if he could demonstrate he was acting in good faith, for the sole benefit of his heirs.
If the billionaire wins, News Corp and Fox are expected to continue along the same path after his death under Lachlan’s leadership, with, for example, Fox News continuing to loudly back the Republican Party in the US.
However, if the three siblings win, a battle over the future of the firms is likely to ensue. In theory, they could challenge the political leaning of Murdoch’s newspapers and channels, or even sell them off – as they could out-vote Lachlan on key decisions.
A third possibility is a compromise or some other kind of settlement being reached. Talks have reportedly been held in recent weeks over James and his sisters selling their stakes in the trust. However, these are said to have failed – possibly due to the potentially high sums involved.
Image: Rupert Murdoch with his sons Lachlan (left) and James (right) at his wedding to Jerry Hall in 2016. Pic: Reuters
The Murdochs involved have made no public statement on the case, with their spokespeople either declining to comment or not responding to requests.
It also comes amid uncertain times for the future of the news industry.
In an interview earlier this summer with Sky News Australia – which is separate from Sky News in the UK – Mr Murdoch predicted that printed newspapers will die out within 15 years due to changes in the ways people consume news.
If he is right, some of the tough questions facing his successors could be far bigger than just which party to back.
Six months ago the International Monetary Fund (IMF) warned that the world economy was heading for a serious slowdown, in the face of Donald Trump’s tariffs.
It slashed its forecasts for economic growth both in the US and predicted that global economic growth would slow to 2.8% this year.
Today the Fund has resurfaced with a markedly different message. It upgraded growth in both the US and elsewhere. Global economic growth this year will actually be 3.2%, it added. So, has the Fund conceded victory to Donald Trump? Is it no longer fretting about the economic impact of tariffs?
Either way, the World Economic Outlook (WEO), the IMF’s six-monthly analysis of economic trends, is well worth a look. This document is perhaps the ultimate synthesis of what economists are feeling about the state of the world, so there’s plenty of insights in there, both about the US, about far-reaching trends like artificial intelligence, about smaller economies like the UK and plenty else besides. Here, then, are four things you need to know from today’s WEO.
The tariff impact is much smaller than expected… so far
The key bit there is the final two words. The Fund upgraded US and global growth, saying: “The global economy has shown resilience to the trade policy shocks”, but added: “The unexpected resilience in activity and muted inflation response reflect – in addition to the fact that the tariff shock has turned out to be smaller than originally announced – a range of factors that provide temporary relief, rather than underlying strength in economic fundamentals.”
In short, the Fund still thinks those things it was worried about six months ago – higher inflation, lower trade flows and weaker income growth – will still kick in. It just now thinks it might take longer than expected.
The UK faces the highest inflation in the industrialised world
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:15
August: Tax rises playing ’50:50′ role in rising inflation
One of the standard exercises each time one of these reports come out is for the Treasury to pick out a flattering statistic they can then go back home and talk about for the following months. This time around the thing they will most likely focus on is that Britain is forecast to have one of the strongest economic growth rates in the G7 (second only to the US) this year, and the third strongest next year.
But there are a couple of less flattering prisms through which one can look at the UK economy. First, if you look not at gross domestic product but (as you really ought to) at GDP per head (which adjusts for the growing population), in fact UK growth next year is poised to be the weakest in the G7 (at just 0.5 per cent).
Second, and perhaps more worryingly, UK inflation remains stubbornly high in comparison to most other economies, the highest in the G7 both this year and next. Why is Britain such an outlier? This is a question both Chancellor Rachel Reeves and Bank of England governor Andrew Bailey will have to explain while in Washington this week for the Fund’s annual meeting.
What happens if the Artificial Intelligence bubble bursts?
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:51
Nvidia CEO hails UK’s place in global AI race
Few, even inside the world of AI, doubt that the extraordinary ramp up in tech share prices in recent months has some of the traits of a financial bubble. But what happens if that bubble goes pop? The Fund has the following, somewhat scary, passage:
“Excessively optimistic growth expectations about AI could be revised in light of incoming data from early adopters and could trigger a market correction. Elevated valuations in tech and AI-linked sectors have been fuelled by expectations of transformative productivity gains. If these gains fail to materialize, the resulting earnings disappointment could lead to a reassessment of the sustainability of AI-driven valuations and a drop in tech stock prices, with systemic implications.
“A potential bust of the AI boom could rival the dot-com crash of 2000 in severity, especially considering the dominance of a few tech firms in market indices and involvement of less-regulated private credit loans funding much of the industry’s expansion. Such a correction could erode household wealth and dampen consumption.”
Pay attention to what’s happening in less developed countries
For many years, one of the main focuses at each IMF meeting was about the state of finances in many of the world’s poorest nations.
Rich countries lined up in Washington with generous policies to provide donations and trim developing world debt. But since the financial crisis, rich world attention has turned inwards – for understandable reasons. One of the upshots of this is that the amount of aid going to poor countries has fallen, year by year. At the same time, the amount these countries are having to pay in their annual debt interest has been creeping up (as have global interest rates). The upshot is something rather disturbing. For the first time in a generation, poor countries’ debt interest payments are now higher than their aid receipts.
I’m not sure what this spells. But what we do know is that when poor countries in the Middle East and Sub-Saharan Africa face financial problems, they often face instability. And when they face instability, that often has knock on consequences for everyone else. All of which is to say, this is something to watch, with concern.
The IMF’s report is strictly speaking the starting gun for a week of meetings in Washington. So there’ll be more to come in the next few days, as finance ministers from around the world meet to discuss the state of the global economy.
There was mixed news elsewhere in the outlook, as the UK’s economic growth forecast, as measured by GDP, was revised up for this year but revised down for next.
Latest data showed inflation stood at 3.8% and is forecast by the Bank of England to reach 4% by the end of the year.
The IMF, however, said it expected inflation to average at 3.4% in 2025, up from its previously predicted 3.2%.
That is forecast to slow to 2.5% this year, higher than the 2.3% anticipated just three months ago.
Food and services inflation had been particularly high in recent months due to rising wage bills and poor harvests.
Economic growth will be a higher 1.3% this year, up from the 1.2% forecast in July, thanks to a strong first few months of the year.
Next year, however, GDP will be 1.4% rather than 1.3% as economies across the world feel trade pressures.
Political reaction
Chancellor Rachel Reeves said: “This is the second consecutive upgrade to this year’s growth forecast from the IMF.
“But know this is just the start. For too many people, our economy feels stuck. Working people feel it every day, experts talk about it, and I am going to deal with it.”
Shadow chancellor Sir Mel Stride said the IMF assessment made for “grim reading”.
“Since taking office, Labour have allowed the cost of living to rise, debt to balloon, and business confidence to collapse to record lows,” he said.
“Working people are feeling the impact every time they shop, fill up the car, or pay their mortgage.”
There was also a surprise increase in the unemployment rate, up to 4.8% from 4.7% a month earlier, primarily driven by younger people, as a record number of people over 65 are in work, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) said.
Economists polled by Reuters anticipated no change in the jobless rate, but instead the figure is now the highest since the three months to May 2021, when the country was in lockdown due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
The ONS, however, has advised caution when interpreting changes in the monthly unemployment rate and job vacancy numbers due to concerns over the reliability of the figures.
More on Uk Economy
Related Topics:
The labour market has struggled in recent months as the cost of employing staff became more expensive due to higher employers’ national insurance contributions and an increased minimum wage.
Wage rises slowing
Further signs of a slowing labour market were seen in the fall of annual private sector wage growth to the lowest rate in nearly four years – 4.4%.
Public sector pay growth increased more quickly, at 6%, as some public sector pay rises were awarded earlier than they were last year.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:25
Inflation up: the bad and ‘good’ news
Average weekly earnings rose more than expected by economists at 5% and also more than previously thought after a revision to last month’s figures (4.8%).
Also published by the ONS was data on industrial action, which showed August had the fewest working days lost to strike action in a single month for nearly six years.
What does it mean for interest rates?
While a tough job market is difficult for people looking for work, the slowing wage rises can mean interest rates are brought down.
The rate-setters at the Bank of England had been concerned about the effect higher wages could have on inflation, which it is mandated to bring to 2% though latest figures showed it was at 3.8%.
Following today’s figures, traders expect a cut in the interest rate to 4.75% in December.
No change is anticipated at the next interest rate setter meeting in November.