Trending Now
We have updated our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use for Eurasia Group and its affiliates, including GZERO Media, to clarify the types of data we collect, how we collect it, how we use data and with whom we share data. By using our website you consent to our Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy, including the transfer of your personal data to the United States from your country of residence, and our use of cookies described in our Cookie Policy.
{{ subpage.title }}
Rupert Murdoch and Lochlan Murdoch
Rupert Murdoch resigns from media empire
Rupert Murdoch announced he is stepping down as chairman of his Fox News and News Corp global media empire, and relinquishing control to his son, Lachlan Murdoch, in a succession that raises questions about the influence of the Murdoch dynasty in the 2024 US elections and beyond.
Over his 70 year career, Murdoch dominated conservative media baron in the US, UK and Australia, using his outlets to sway the political pendulum to the right and act as a kingmaker within the Republican Party. Fox News was instrumental in bringing Donald Trump to power in 2016.
The transition comes at a difficult time for the conglomerate, which paid out a $787.5 million settlement and faces multiple shareholder lawsuits over spreading misinformation during the 2020 elections. It is also seeing ratings stagnate as viewers move towards extreme outlets like Newsmax and individual creators like Tucker Carlson– whom Fox ousted earlier this year.
Ahead of the 2024 election, whether Fox News will be able to maintain its power without Murdoch and amidst a more competitive and decentralized political media landscape remains to be seen.
Members of the activist groups Truth Tuesdays and Rise and Resist gathered at a weekly FOX LIES DEMOCRACY DIES event outside the NewsCorp Building in Manhattan.
Dominion Voting v. Fox News: The stakes are higher than you think
Fox News and Dominion Voting Systems, following a one-day delay, are set to square off in court on Tuesday. Dominion is suing for defamation, claiming that Fox’s hosts and guests knowingly spread a false narrative that the company’s voting systems flipped votes against former President Donald Trump in the 2020 election.
What’s at stake?$1.6 billion, the future of the media industry, and the Super Bowl of libel law decisions.
The outcome will have implications for both the media and the First Amendment. SinceNew York Times v. Sullivan gave broad protection to the American press in 1964, there have been almost impossibly high standards for suing a media organization for defamation. Prosecutors need to prove “actual malice” or that the outlet knowingly, or with reckless disregard for the truth, published a falsehood.
Dominion says Fox pushed lies about it algorithmically transferring votes to Biden. These lies, Dominion claims, cost it $1.6 billion in reputational damages. Armed with emails and texts, Dominion’s legal team reportedly aims to reveal that Fox News execs and hosts did not believe Trump’s election fraud claims.
Fox News, meanwhile, is expected to argue that it is protected by the First Amendment and that it was merely covering Trump’s narrative about the results. Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity, and founder Rupert Murdoch are expected to testify.
Why haven’t they settled? Slated to begin on Monday, the trail was delayed late Sunday for last-minute settlement discussions. Negotiations are not expected to succeed, as Dominion is fighting to recoup its reputation more than financial losses.
Fox News may be more amenable to settling after being reprimanded for potentially withholding evidence. But any settlement would also include an apology under terms set by Dominion, which would come at a reputational loss for the right-wing media giant.
Dominion’s lawyers, who filed requests with the court on Monday that indicate they are ready to proceed, believe they have enough evidence to meet the defamation threshold.
If the jury sides with Dominion, the ruling will upend decades of defamation precedent protecting the media. If Fox prevails, it will send the message that the First Amendment protects outlets even when they spread disinformation. Whatever the decision, the implications of this trial extend far beyond the courtroom.