When it comes to corporate governance, you can always rely on Rupert Murdoch to take the low road. And so it goes with his so-called “retirement” and handover to his eldest son, Lachlan.
This should have been announced by the independent directors of News Corp and Fox Corp, who represent the 80%+ of the companies owned by non-Murdoch shareholders. But no, the only company heads given a platform to discuss this were Rupert and Lachlan themselves, the joint leaders of two major publicly listed media empires.
As Crikey reported in August, in their 2022-23 profit results, both News Corp and Fox Corp withheld disclosing the pay packets for Lachlan and Rupert, so we didn’t know just how much more they’d been paid last year on top of the $1.74 billion given to Murdoch men by public companies over the past 24 years.
However, when you’re paid vast sums to hold media power through public companies, sometimes you actually have to turn up — and for 92-year-old Rupert Murdoch, in recent years this has been increasingly difficult.
After giving disastrous private evidence in the Dominion trial, the prospect of Rupert facing a public cross-examination in the opening days of the actual trial was reportedly the key problem to avoid: hence the humiliating US$787.5 million settlement.
With the shareholder writs subsequently flying, you can’t keep throwing company funds away just to prevent your leader from turning up to defend the empire’s various atrocities — in this case, Fox News lying about the so-called stolen election.
The same problem arises with the AGMs of Fox Corp and News Corp, which are coming up in November, although we still don’t have actual dates or the documentation setting out the agenda.
While Rupert has barely turned up to a quarterly earnings call with analysts in recent years, as co-executive chairman of both companies — who was paid almost $40 million to do both jobs last year — he can’t exactly keep skipping the AGMs into his 90s.
On first hearing the “chairman emeritus” move, I assumed this would involve Rupert staying on both boards but reducing his pay. There are many founders — think Frank Lowy at Westfield — who have done this. But no, this News Corp announcement to the SEC confirms that he will formally be off the board at the end of the upcoming AGM. Fox Corp hasn’t released a similar announcement to the SEC, but this press release confirmed that he would be exiting both boards at their AGMs.
One of the most enthusiastic advocates for Rupert actually leaving the two boards is probably Lachlan, who has never really had an opportunity to shine away from his famous father’s shadow. Indeed, the two public company boards that Lachlan did serve on away from his father — One.Tel and Ten Network Holdings — both turned into disastrous corporate collapses with total losses in each exceeding $1 billion.
It will ultimately be up to the boards of Fox and News Corp to select their next CEO and chair. This is partly why Rupert and Lachlan attempted to put the two companies back together last year, because one chess board would be easier to manage than two, particularly regarding succession. However, independent shareholders and Lachlan’s more progressive younger brother James reportedly had other ideas, hence the proposal being parked.
As for Rupert’s legacy, he really has led the world’s most powerful family for arguably 30 years. But has he used that power for good, while building a $30 billion fortune for his family?
Fighting action on climate change, backing Brexit, backing Trump, backing the disastrous second Iraq war and debauching journalism through dodgy practices such as phone hacking leave a pretty toxic legacy. Even something like a failed Voice referendum will get pinned on Rupert.
He could have deployed his media power with a simple directive such as “of course Indigenous peoples should be recognised in the constitution and what’s wrong with giving them an advisory committee”.
Alas, the nasty old man wasn’t even able to bring himself to that, hence division and enmity prevail yet again.
Thanks for nothing, Rupert.
Rupert Murdoch’s success was always due to a lack of moral courage by politicians to oppose him.
Can still see the old man now, first in line for the Covid jab courtesy of the public health system he sought to destroy, while his paid minions spread lies and conspiracy theories that persuaded loyal subscribers against doing the things (getting vaccinated, wearing a mask) that might have saved the lives of themselves and others.
It would be fitting for a suitably inane 3-word slogan (perhaps Profit from Death) to be etched onto whatever memorial stands for the man after his passing.
Much less than nothing Stephen!
Muckraker Murdoch’s long and torturous tenure has proven one thing unequivocally; nastiness sells. He realised a long time ago that stirring the pot and inflaming passions through misinformation, distortion, and outright lies makes a lot more money than simply reporting the facts. He makes it both ways; by stirring up the uniformed through pushing unfounded conspiracies and “alternative facts”, he gets them to pay for his “News” services; getting them all riled up forces the informed and well-read to try to counter the bullshit he pushes, providing him with extra publicity and fuel for more BS. His only interest is in how much money he can spin out of every controversy.
For him, it’s a win-win situation.
The Mr Burns of the media world. His influence has been like a malignant cancer. The world will be a better place when he dies.
I hope he’s interred here, so I can pay appropriate respect.