As Queen Elizabeth is laid to rest, only one living person remains who can match her for length of service at the head of a family firm. And while Rupert Murdoch’s publications have caused the royal family plenty of grief, there are many similarities between him and the late monarch, as Crikey founder Stephen Mayne reports.
When it comes to who you know or who you’ve met, the late Queen Elizabeth and Rupert Murdoch would be hard to beat globally over the past 70 years, each having dealt with numerous US presidents, UK and Australian prime ministers, billionaires, global CEOs, sporting legends and movie stars.
While Murdoch has spent decades profiting from scandalising the British royal family, including through illegal phone hacking, it is unclear if he ever forged much of a relationship directly with the Queen. Indeed, unlike with most world leaders, Rupert didn’t say a word to mark her passing and certainly wasn’t invited to her funeral. And for a man whose journalists have conducted millions of on the record interviews, the Queen is one interview his army of hacks was never granted.
That said, there are many interesting similarities between Murdoch and the Queen. Both suddenly lost their fathers in 1952 and assumed the leadership positions that would hold for the rest of their lives: Elizabeth Windsor as Britain’s monarch and Rupert Murdoch as CEO and controlling shareholder of the Adelaide-based public company News Ltd, which first floated in 1922.
Elizabeth got the job because she was the eldest child of the reigning monarch and Britain didn’t discriminate against female leaders. Rupert got the job because his father, Sir Keith Murdoch, had an old-fashioned patriarchal perspective and ignored his daughters by passing management control of News Ltd to his only son, although Rupert later bought his three sisters out of the family trust for about $600 million in the 1990s.
The Queen ruled for 70 years, seven months and two days after assuming the throne while in Kenya after her father died on February 6, 1952, at the age of 56.
Murdoch was also overseas, studying at Oxford, when his father died suddenly at Cruden Farm on the outskirts of Melbourne on October 5, 1952, at the age of 67. Rupert took charge of News Ltd in January 1953 at the age of 21, whereas Elizabeth was 25 when she became Queen.
Chasing the crown of longevity
If Murdoch can last until August next year, he will overtake the Queen in terms of length of tenure, something I suspect has been a goal in recent years. He is certainly the world’s longest-serving public company CEO or chair and might even yet outlast all of the world’s longest serving monarchs which are detailed on this list.
From a governance point of view, it is less than ideal that leaders can choose to die on the job rather than handing over to younger leadership. Do we really want Charles attempting to perform the role of King of Australia for more than 20 years into his 90s as well before handing over to his eldest son, William?
Murdoch is also attempting to hand power to his eldest son, Lachlan, but is Queen-like in delaying the full handover for as long as possible, instead perhaps preferring to die on the job too.
Murdoch might have personal control over the gerrymandered 40% voting bloc of News Corp and Fox Corp that the family controls, but once he passes, that will be equally shared by his four adult children: Lachlan, James and Elisabeth Murdoch and his eldest Prudence MacLeod, the only child from his first marriage.
Therefore, Lachlan Murdoch may have just secured a contract extension to be CEO of Fox Corp until at least June 2026, but, unlike Prince Charles, he is no certainty to assume the top job once his father passes. While the Privy Council swiftly swore in King Charles, when Rupert passes, it will initially be a matter for the incumbent News Corp and Fox Corp directors to determine management succession. After that, it will come down to control over those two 40% voting stakes at the first Fox and News Corp AGMs after Rupert passes when all directors will be up for election.
When it comes to comparing the financial situations of the British Royals and the Murdochs, as MWM has noted, Murdoch men have been paid more than $1.5 billion in salaries and bonuses (see full list) from public companies they’ve controlled through gerrymandered capital structures over the past 22 years.
Revealed: how the Murdoch men looted $1.4 billion in salary from public companies
Fox Corp snuck out its 82-page 2022 proxy statement a few hours after the Queen’s death was announced and it revealed that Lachlan’s pay was cut by $US6 million to $US21.7 million in 2021-22. Meanwhile, 91-year-old Rupert struggled along as Fox’s joint executive chairman on $US18.4 million, down from $US31.1 million the year before. Having not fronted a quarterly earnings call in recent times, it is not exactly clear what Rupert is doing for all that money.
The combined haul of $US40.1 million is the lowest amount Murdoch men have been paid by a public company called Fox since the original 21st Century Fox demerger in 2013. The family is worth an estimated $30 billion and could well afford to follow the Packer family lead of working for free at public companies they control.
As for the royals, Murdoch’s Sunday Times produces a UK Rich List and reckons the Queen was personally worth about $630 million, most of which is expected to pass to Charles.
The Crown Estate, which includes most of the castles, is owned by British taxpayers and was valued at $US28 billion this year. The royal family is normally entitled to 15% of its earnings to live, but this was increased to 25% in 2017-18 for a decade to help pay for a $630 million 10-year renovation of Buckingham Palace.
Tea at the palace
It will be interesting to see if King Charles invites Murdoch over to Buckingham Palace for tea at some point, as the last thing he needs is The Sun and The Times attacking his performance at home or the broader Murdoch empire egging on republican sentiment in Australia.
Then again, ever since the phone-hacking scandals a decade ago, the Murdochs have largely laid off the senior royals, besides the constant attacks on Meghan Markle since she and Harry departed the firm.
While the Queen and Rupert maintained a policy of not suing media outlets, their children have forged a different path with Lachlan Murdoch recently launching a much-discussed defamation action in the Federal Court against Crikey and Harry suing News Corp in 2019 for allegedly hacking his phone.
The $US39 billion sale of Sky Plc in 2018 also means the Murdochs have far less to play for in the UK, particularly since Rupert recently decided to divorce Jerry Hall, the only one of his four ex-wives who was based in the UK.
However, this hasn’t stopped wall-to-wall coverage of the Queen’s passing on Sky News Australia which even sent two of their right-wing after-dark ranters, Peta Credlin and Paul Murray, to record their shows live in daylight hours from a temporary outdoor studio near Buckingham Palace.
In all of their coverage, not once did they mention the other common thread between the Queen’s family and their Murdoch paymasters – that both preside through thoroughly undemocratic means with the Murdochs only remaining atop their empire courtesy of that notorious gerrymander which sees 70% of the Fox and News Corp shares on issue denied a vote.
No one gets to directly vote on the royal family, but then again, they don’t have anything like the power of the Murdochs, who remain arguably the most powerful family in the world, capable of delivering lamentable outcomes such as the second Iraq War, Brexit, Western world climate denialism and President Trump, to name a few.
Stephen Mayne is a Walkley Award winning journalist, shareholder activist, former City of Melbourne councillor, former spindoctor for Jeff Kennett’s Victorian Liberal Government, current City of Manningham councillor, founder of Crikey and publisher of The Mayne Report.