Murdoch family trust case involving Fox News ownership heard by Nevada Supreme Court
-
Note that the outcome of the underlying case, which is about the future of the Murdoch media empire (i.e. whether control over it will fall exclusively to conservative Lachlan Murdoch or be evenly split among all four heirs, of whom three are comparatively liberal), will be extremely consequential for both media and politics on a global scale.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Fascinating - so he changed the trust to grant all power to the eldest son but other kids ain't happy and the details are sealed so makes you wonder what spicy shit is in there. This is some evil empire drama.
The push is coming from a coalition of other big media sources and this "Our Nevada Judges" (ONJ) non-profit which basically all they do is civic action against sealed material - what a cool organization!
-
Burn it all to the ground, kids.
Greg has entered the chat
-
Succession
Did you think the show was based on something else?
-
Note that the outcome of the underlying case, which is about the future of the Murdoch media empire (i.e. whether control over it will fall exclusively to conservative Lachlan Murdoch or be evenly split among all four heirs, of whom three are comparatively liberal), will be extremely consequential for both media and politics on a global scale.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Fuck this dude with a rusty spade. He's a monster, so bad that even his extreme old age doesn't temper my hate.
-
Fascinating - so he changed the trust to grant all power to the eldest son but other kids ain't happy and the details are sealed so makes you wonder what spicy shit is in there. This is some evil empire drama.
The push is coming from a coalition of other big media sources and this "Our Nevada Judges" (ONJ) non-profit which basically all they do is civic action against sealed material - what a cool organization!
wrote on last edited by [email protected]The Atlantic article that I linked in the post description talks at length about the spicy shit (especially about the family relations and only comparatively little about the legal aspects).
-
Did you think the show was based on something else?
The most staggering thing though is that the show has had quite noticeable repercussions on the dealings of the real-life Murdochs. Anyone who would like a long read on all this can check out the Atlantic article linked in the post description.
-
The most staggering thing though is that the show has had quite noticeable repercussions on the dealings of the real-life Murdochs. Anyone who would like a long read on all this can check out the Atlantic article linked in the post description.
Rupert, for his part, seemed to resent his son for what he saw as a preoccupation with respectability
Lol pretty much sums up Rupert right there. Thanks for the read
-
Note that the outcome of the underlying case, which is about the future of the Murdoch media empire (i.e. whether control over it will fall exclusively to conservative Lachlan Murdoch or be evenly split among all four heirs, of whom three are comparatively liberal), will be extremely consequential for both media and politics on a global scale.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]What legal ground do they have to stand on?
“I want to revoke an irrevocable trust because the recipients aren’t conservative?”
-
Note that the outcome of the underlying case, which is about the future of the Murdoch media empire (i.e. whether control over it will fall exclusively to conservative Lachlan Murdoch or be evenly split among all four heirs, of whom three are comparatively liberal), will be extremely consequential for both media and politics on a global scale.
For some reason I thought this was an australian court thing. was unaware it was going on in the us.
-
For some reason I thought this was an australian court thing. was unaware it was going on in the us.
It will turn out that the corporation exists in Nevada due to some sort of tax break years ago.
-
Note that the outcome of the underlying case, which is about the future of the Murdoch media empire (i.e. whether control over it will fall exclusively to conservative Lachlan Murdoch or be evenly split among all four heirs, of whom three are comparatively liberal), will be extremely consequential for both media and politics on a global scale.
May they tear up each other in court.
-
What legal ground do they have to stand on?
“I want to revoke an irrevocable trust because the recipients aren’t conservative?”
wrote on last edited by [email protected]There's a provision that says the trust structure can be changed without everyone's consent if the intended change is in the interest of all trustees. Rupert, Lachlan and their team want to exploit this by arguing that the ongoing financial success of the media empire is dependent on it retaining its staunchly conservative editorial line, so that it is in fact (from a financial point of view) in the interest of the three non-conservative children if they don't get to have any influence. The first judge wasn't buying it; let's hope that the others will rule the same way. (One argument in their favor is that the $787 million settlement that Fox News has to pay to Dominion Voting System due to a defamation lawsuit was a consequence of Rupert's or Lachlan's die-hard conservative messaging.)
What's less good: I remember dimly that, should Rupert live long enough (past theö year 2030?), he can change the trust at will again.
-
Note that the outcome of the underlying case, which is about the future of the Murdoch media empire (i.e. whether control over it will fall exclusively to conservative Lachlan Murdoch or be evenly split among all four heirs, of whom three are comparatively liberal), will be extremely consequential for both media and politics on a global scale.
Ngl it would be the height of comedy if Fox did an ideological about-face
-
There's a provision that says the trust structure can be changed without everyone's consent if the intended change is in the interest of all trustees. Rupert, Lachlan and their team want to exploit this by arguing that the ongoing financial success of the media empire is dependent on it retaining its staunchly conservative editorial line, so that it is in fact (from a financial point of view) in the interest of the three non-conservative children if they don't get to have any influence. The first judge wasn't buying it; let's hope that the others will rule the same way. (One argument in their favor is that the $787 million settlement that Fox News has to pay to Dominion Voting System due to a defamation lawsuit was a consequence of Rupert's or Lachlan's die-hard conservative messaging.)
What's less good: I remember dimly that, should Rupert live long enough (past theö year 2030?), he can change the trust at will again.
Wow sometimes I see something and am just struck by how America is a Mammonite theocracy
-
Note that the outcome of the underlying case, which is about the future of the Murdoch media empire (i.e. whether control over it will fall exclusively to conservative Lachlan Murdoch or be evenly split among all four heirs, of whom three are comparatively liberal), will be extremely consequential for both media and politics on a global scale.
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Rupert Murdoch should have been executed long ago and Fox "News" sold off with the proceeds going to all the people whose lives his abomination and its lies have ruined.
