
Rupert Murdoch's audacious bid to cement his eldest son's control over one of the world's most influential media empires has failed, a US report said Monday. The first family of news -- commanding a stable that includes Fox News, The Wall Street Journal and a host of British and Australian media -- had been the inspiration for the hit TV series "Succession." Like the fictional version, this real-life fight pitted the children of a powerful patriarch against each other for who should be the face and the voice of the empire after the old man dies. Murdoch, now 93, had long intended that his children inherit the empire, and jointly decide its direction. The eldest daughter, Prudence, has had little involvement in the family business, but at various times the other three -- Lachlan, James and Elisabeth -- have all been considered as successors. But in recent years Murdoch senior had reportedly grown concerned that Fox News -- the crown jewels of the collection -- might drift away from its lucrative right-wing moorings after his death, to reflect the more centrist views of James and Elisabeth. He had therefore sought to designate Lachlan -- who currently heads Fox News and News Corp -- as the controlling player in the wider business. That had required rewriting the terms of an irrevocable trust that passed power to the four siblings jointly, stripping three of them of voting power, while allowing them to continue to benefit financially. Rupert Murdoch had argued that giving control to Lachlan -- who is understood to share his father's worldview -- was in the financial interests of the whole brood. The family intrigue played out behind closed doors in a Nevada courtroom, where Murdoch senior and his four children were understood to have given several days' evidence in September. In a decision filed at the weekend, probate commissioner Edmund J. Gorman Jr. said the father and son had acted in "bad faith" in trying to rewrite the rules, The New York Times reported, citing a copy of the sealed court document. More from this section The plan to alter the trust's structure was a "carefully crafted charade" to "permanently cement Lachlan Murdoch's executive roles." "The effort was an attempt to stack the deck in Lachlan Murdoch's favor after Rupert Murdoch's passing so that his succession would be immutable," the Times cited the ruling as saying. "The play might have worked; but an evidentiary hearing, like a showdown in a game of poker, is where gamesmanship collides with the facts and at its conclusion, all the bluffs are called and the cards lie face up. "The court, after considering the facts of this case in the light of the law, sees the cards for what they are and concludes this raw deal will not, over the signature of this probate commissioner, prevail." Murdoch's lawyer, Adam Streisand, did not immediately reply to an AFP request for comment. The ruling is not final, and must now be ratified or rejected by a district judge. That ruling could be challenged, perhaps provoking another round of legal arguments. The complicated structure of the irrevocable trust reflects the colourful familial relationships that shaped Rupert Murdoch's life as he built the multibillion-dollar empire. The trust was reported to have been the result of a deal agreed with his second wife -- mother of Lachlan, Elisabeth and James -- who wanted to ensure her offspring would not be disenfranchised by children Murdoch had with his third wife, Wendi Deng. The Murdoch empire has transformed tabloid newspapers, cable TV and satellite broadcasting over the last few decades while facing accusations of stoking populism across the English-speaking world. Brexit in Britain and the rise of Donald Trump in the United States are credited at least partly to Murdoch and his outlets. hg/nro
LAS VEGAS (AP) — A team that previously boycotted at least one match against the San Jose State women's volleyball program will again be faced with the decision whether to play the school , this time in the Mountain West Conference semifinals with a shot at the NCAA Tournament on the line. Five schools forfeited matches in the regular season against San Jose State, which carried a No. 2 seed into the conference tournament in Las Vegas. Among those schools: No. 3 Utah State and No. 6 Boise State, who will face off Wednesday with the winner scheduled to play the Spartans in the semifinals on Friday. Wyoming, Nevada and Southern Utah — which is not a Mountain West member — also canceled regular-season matches, all without explicitly saying why they were forfeiting. Nevada players cited fairness in women’s sports as a reason to boycott their match, while political figures from Wyoming, Idaho, Utah and Nevada suggested the cancellations center around protecting women’s sports. In a lawsuit filed against the NCAA , plaintiffs cited unspecified reports asserting there was a transgender player on the San Jose State volleyball team, even naming her. While some media have reported those and other details, neither San Jose State nor the forfeiting teams have confirmed the school has a trans women’s volleyball player. The Associated Press is withholding the player’s name because she has not publicly commented on her gender identity and through school officials has declined an interview request. A judge on Monday rejected a request made by nine current conference players to block the San Jose State player from competing in the tournament on grounds that she is transgender. That ruling was upheld Tuesday by an appeals court. “The team looks forward to starting Mountain West Conference tournament competition on Friday,” San Jose State said in a statement issued after the appeals court decision. “The university maintains an unwavering commitment to the participation, safety and privacy of all students at San Jose State and ensuring they are able to compete in an inclusive, fair and respectful environment.” Chris Kutz, a Boise State athletics spokesman, said in an email the university would not “comment on potential matchups at this time.” Doug Hoffman, an Aggies athletics spokesman, said in an email Utah State is reviewing the court’s order. “Right now, our women’s volleyball program is focused on the game this Wednesday, and we’ll be cheering them on,” Hoffman wrote. San Jose State, which had a first-round bye, would be sent directly to the conference title game if Utah State or Boise State were to forfeit again. If the Spartans make the title game, it's likely the opponent would not forfeit. They would face top-seeded Colorado State, No. 4 Fresno State or No. 5 San Diego State — all teams that played the Spartans this season. The conference champion receives an automatic bid to the NCAA Tournament. AP college sports: https://apnews.com/hub/college-sports"Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum." Section 1.10.32 of "de Finibus Bonorum et Malorum", written by Cicero in 45 BC "Sed ut perspiciatis unde omnis iste natus error sit voluptatem accusantium doloremque laudantium, totam rem aperiam, eaque ipsa quae ab illo inventore veritatis et quasi architecto beatae vitae dicta sunt explicabo. Nemo enim ipsam voluptatem quia voluptas sit aspernatur aut odit aut fugit, sed quia consequuntur magni dolores eos qui ratione voluptatem sequi nesciunt. Neque porro quisquam est, qui dolorem ipsum quia dolor sit amet, consectetur, adipisci velit, sed quia non numquam eius modi tempora incidunt ut labore et dolore magnam aliquam quaerat voluptatem. Ut enim ad minima veniam, quis nostrum exercitationem ullam corporis suscipit laboriosam, nisi ut aliquid ex ea commodi consequatur? Quis autem vel eum iure reprehenderit qui in ea voluptate velit esse quam nihil molestiae consequatur, vel illum qui dolorem eum fugiat quo voluptas nulla pariatur?" 1914 translation by H. Rackham "But I must explain to you how all this mistaken idea of denouncing pleasure and praising pain was born and I will give you a complete account of the system, and expound the actual teachings of the great explorer of the truth, the master-builder of human happiness. No one rejects, dislikes, or avoids pleasure itself, because it is pleasure, but because those who do not know how to pursue pleasure rationally encounter consequences that are extremely painful. Nor again is there anyone who loves or pursues or desires to obtain pain of itself, because it is pain, but because occasionally circumstances occur in which toil and pain can procure him some great pleasure. To take a trivial example, which of us ever undertakes laborious physical exercise, except to obtain some advantage from it? But who has any right to find fault with a man who chooses to enjoy a pleasure that has no annoying consequences, or one who avoids a pain that produces no resultant pleasure?" 1914 translation by H. Rackham "But I must explain to you how all this mistaken idea of denouncing pleasure and praising pain was born and I will give you a complete account of the system, and expound the actual teachings of the great explorer of the truth, the master-builder of human happiness. No one rejects, dislikes, or avoids pleasure itself, because it is pleasure, but because those who do not know how to pursue pleasure rationally encounter consequences that are extremely painful. Nor again is there anyone who loves or pursues or desires to obtain pain of itself, because it is pain, but because occasionally circumstances occur in which toil and pain can procure him some great pleasure. To take a trivial example, which of us ever undertakes laborious physical exercise, except to obtain some advantage from it? But who has any right to find fault with a man who chooses to enjoy a pleasure that has no annoying consequences, or one who avoids a pain that produces no resultant pleasure?" Thanks for your interest in Kalkine Media's content! To continue reading, please log in to your account or create your free account with us.
NoneCynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande were paid the same salary for their co-starring roles in Wicked , according to a Universal Pictures spokesperson. The response follows unsubstantiated rumors on social media around the Wicked stars earnings on the blockbuster musical. “Reports of pay disparity between Cynthia and Ariana are completely false and based on internet fodder,” a Universal spokesperson said in a statement to Variety Tuesday. “The women received equal pay for their work on Wicked .” TikTok and Reddit users falsely reported that Grande earned $15 million, while Erivo made $1 million. To make matters worse, several news outlets repeated the inaccurate findings. The Universal spokesperson did not disclose how much the co-stars both earned. A rep for Universal Pictures did not immediately return Rolling Stone ‘s request for comment. The film, which hit theaters Friday, draws inspiration from Gregory Maguire’s 1995 novel Wicked, which serves as a revisionist prequel to The Wizard of Oz . The Jon M. Chu film adapts Part One of the hit musical and begins with Erivo’s green-skinned Elphaba as an ostracized, Shiz University student who bunks with Grande’s Glinda. After an unlikely makeover and a dance duet at a school function, the sworn enemies become best mates. Things take a turn for the worse after Elphaba and Glinda visit The Wizard, played by Jeff Goldblum, in the Emerald City. Wicked earned a whopping $164 million on its opening weekend, globally, making it the third largest opening weekend after Deadpool & Wolverine and Inside Out 2. Part Two has a release date set for Nov. 21, 2025.