An article with international angles, it examines conflicts around the family trust of the media entrepreneur who has shaped the industry for half a century. These issues carry lessons for the broader trust and estate planning sector.

This contributor writes about the conflicts developing over the family trust of media tycoon Rupert Murdoch. The Australian-born entrepreneur needs little introduction; his impact on the world of media and public affairs has been considerable. The author is Matthew Erskine, managing partner, Erskine & Erskine. 

Although the author is based in the US northeast, the issues raised here are global. After all, Mr Murdoch is Australian by birth, and has made a life in the UK, US and his business empire straddles the globe. We hope readers in many jurisdictions find these insights of value.

As ever with the views of guest writers, the editors don’t necessarily share the views of such writers, and if you wish to respond, email tom.burroughes@wealthbriefing.com

The Murdoch Family Trust, a key player in controlling Rupert Murdoch's vast media empire, (which includes Fox News, The Wall Street Journal, and the New York Post) is at the centre of a significant controversy. This unfolding drama over its future has been reported by the New York Times. While the focus here is on family businesses, the principles discussed are equally applicable to artists, collectors, and anyone managing high emotional and financial value assets.

Background
The trust's foundation dates back to Rupert Murdoch's 1999 divorce from his second wife, Anna Murdoch Mann, the mother of James, Elisabeth, and Lachlan Murdoch. The trust was established to hold the family's 28.5 per cent stake in News Corporation, valued at approximately $6.1 billion in 2005. The structure was designed to grant voting rights to Murdoch's children from his first two marriages, while his children with Wendi Deng would share in the stock's proceeds but have no voting rights or control.

Murdoch, now 93, is involved in a legal dispute with three of his four adult children over the future of the media empire. He filed a petition to amend the irrevocable family trust to grant exclusive control to his eldest son and chosen successor, Lachlan Murdoch. 

Currently, control of the family business is set to transition to his four eldest children (Lachlan, James, Elisabeth, and Prudence) upon his death, with each having an equal vote. Murdoch contends that empowering Lachlan to run the company without interference from his more politically moderate siblings will preserve its conservative editorial stance and protect its commercial value for all heirs.

James, Elisabeth, and Prudence were surprised by their father's attempt to modify the trust and have united to oppose him. A Nevada probate commissioner has ruled that Rupert Murdoch can amend the trust if he demonstrates that he is acting in good faith and solely for the benefit of his heirs. A trial to assess Murdoch's good faith is expected to begin in September 2024.

Historical precedents
The Murdoch family trust dispute, while unique, is not without historical precedents in the media industry. Notable examples include:

-- Bancroft family and Dow Jones: In 2007, the Bancroft family, controlling Dow Jones & Company through a complex trust structure, faced internal disputes during Rupert Murdoch's successful takeover bid. Some family members wanted to sell, while others resisted, leading to tensions.

-- Bingham family and Louisville newspapers: The Bingham family, owners of The Courier-Journal and The Louisville Times, experienced a bitter feud in the 1980s when the patriarch decided to sell the media properties, causing conflicts among his children over the trust's management.

-- Chandler family and Times Mirror Company: The Chandler family, controlling the Los Angeles Times and other media assets, faced internal conflicts in the late 1990s and early 2000s, leading to the sale of Times Mirror to Tribune Company in 2000.

-- Scripps family and EW Scripps Company: Disputes over the company's direction in the early 2000s led to a restructuring of the trust and the company's assets.

-- Pulitzer family and Pulitzer Publishing Company: In the late 1990s, internal conflicts over whether to sell the company resulted in the sale of Pulitzer Publishing to Lee Enterprises in 2005.

These cases share common themes, such as tensions between preserving family control and maximising financial value, conflicts over the company's future direction, and balancing interests across generations within a family trust.

Broader implications
While the Murdoch Family Trust dispute and similar historical precedents are rooted in the media industry, the principles and solutions discussed apply broadly to any scenario involving high emotional and financial stakes. This includes artists, collectors, and other individuals managing valuable assets.

Artists and collectors: Just like family businesses, artists and collectors often deal with the complexities of managing valuable assets, whether it's a collection of artworks or a significant estate. The emotional attachment to these assets can lead to conflicts similar to those seen in family-controlled businesses.

Succession planning: For artists, planning the succession of their artworks and intellectual property is crucial to ensuring that their legacy is preserved and their wishes are honored. Collectors must also consider how their collections will be managed and passed on to future generations.

Governance Structures: Establishing clear governance structures for art collections or estates can help manage expectations and decision-making, preventing disputes among heirs or stakeholders.

Common goals: Developing a common goal for the management of art collections or estates ensures that decisions made align with the collective interests of all stakeholders involved.

Professional mediation and advice: Engaging neutral third parties and professional advisors can help navigate the complex legal and emotional landscapes, ensuring fair and sustainable management of valuable assets.

Applying the "Tragedy of the Commons" systems archetype
The "Tragedy of the Commons" systems archetype can be applied to predict and offer solutions to conflicts like those in the Murdoch Family Trust by understanding how shared resources are managed and potentially depleted through individual self-interest.

Prediction of conflict
-- Shared resource depletion: The Murdoch Family Trust, like a common resource, can be over-exploited or mismanaged if individual beneficiaries act in their own self-interest, depleting its value.

-- Reinforcing loops: Competition among family members for control can lead to a breakdown in family relations and the trust's value.

-- Ignorance and self-interest: Family members may not fully understand the long-term consequences of their actions, for instance individuals ignoring the collective impact on a common resource.

Solutions offered
-- Identify the commons: Clearly define the trust's key assets, decision-making powers, and responsibilities shared among family members.

-- Determine incentives: Understand each family member's motivations and perceived benefits from controlling the trust.

-- Develop a common goal: Establish a common goal for the trust to guide decision-making and prioritize collective benefits over individual interests.

-- Implement a final arbiter: Introduce a neutral third party or governance structure to oversee the trust's management and resolve disputes.

-- Provide system-wide feedback: Create transparency and accountability mechanisms, such as regular reporting and assessment of individual actions' impacts on the trust.

-- Reevaluate resource limits: Periodically reassess the trust's resources and constraints to ensure sustainable management.

Strategies to avoid similar conflicts
To prevent such disputes in family-controlled businesses and other high-stakes scenarios, consider the following strategies:

-- Establish clear governance structures: Define decision-making processes and expectations clearly.

-- Obtain professional mediation: Neutral third parties can help mediate complex family dynamics and high-stakes decisions.

-- Address succession planning early: Proactive planning can prevent conflicts and power struggles.

-- Balance multiple concerns: Consider business continuity, family harmony, fairness, and long-term value in succession plans.

-- Communicate openly: Prevent misunderstandings and manage expectations through open communication.

-- Seek professional advice: Engage advisors to navigate complex legal and financial issues.

-- Consider the impact on company value: Ensure decisions benefit all heirs and protect the company's value.

-- Evaluate successors' readiness: Assess potential successors' alignment with the company's vision and values.

-- Address potential conflicts of interest: Consider personal and business interests in succession planning.

-- Prepare for legal challenges: Anticipate and prepare for potential disputes.

The Murdoch case highlights the challenges of balancing business continuity, family harmony, and individual aspirations in high-stakes succession planning. 

These strategies can help other family businesses, artists, collectors, and individuals managing valuable assets to avoid similar conflicts and ensure a smoother transition of control and management.