How should we assess Rupert Murdoch’s legacy?
A ship’s captain is responsible for the actions of his entire crew. Leaders who refuse to acknowledge responsibility for the actions of their employees should be robustly challenged, not let off the hook.
In September 2023, Rupert Murdoch announced he would become Emeritus Chair of the Boards of Fox Corporation and News Corporation. Over decades, through these very profitable companies, he had built a behemoth of a media empire that reshaped politics in several countries. Many people regard its assertions with the reverence usually reserved for religious scriptures.
In 2012, however, a British parliamentary committee judged Murdoch “not a fit person to exercise the stewardship of a major international company” adding he had displayed “wilful blindness” (a legal term). Journalists at his News of the World tabloid had hacked a kidnapped teenager’s cell phone. They kept deleting fresh voicemail messages, leading the police and her parents to believe she was alive. Hackings, routine affairs at that tabloid (and others), also ensnared celebrities and politicians; Prince Harry’s lawsuit is still being litigated.
Revisiting Murdoch’s (and his former heir-apparent son, James’) testimony at the end of his career is critically important. Top executives are rarely held accountable publicly for terrible failures of judgment because white-collar crimes are notoriously hard to prove. Usually, mid-tier executives who implement their decisions get blamed.
“Asked if he 'ultimately' was 'responsible for this whole fiasco,' Murdoch said, 'No.' ”
Instead, the committee mostly asked the two men whether they had attended specific meetings, read specific emails, or authorized specific payments. Rupert Murdoch’s repeated “I don’t remember,” answers reminded me of Sargent Schultz, the sitcom character infamous for saying, “I hear nothing, I see nothing, I know nothing!”
Financial pundits opined that the hearings hadn’t damaged the Murdochs. News Corp’s shares rose sharply.