Rupert Murdoch

Sept. 26 (UPI) — President Donald Trump signed an executive order Thursday to complete a deal to keep TikTok active for 170 million U.S. users with U.S. investors owning 80% of the company.

The deal creates a U.S. entity to control TikTok while ByteDance will maintain less than a 20% stake. A board of directors composed chiefly of Americans will oversee the operation of TikTok, including its highly sought-after algorithm.

Data on U.S. users will be stored and managed by Oracle, a technology company based in Nashville. ByteDance partnered with Oracle in 2020 to house U.S. user data in the United States due to concerns about data security from the U.S. government.

During the signing of the executive order at the White House, Trump said the deal was approved by Chinese President Xi Jinping during a phone conversation last week.

“He gave us the go ahead,” Trump said. “I told him what we’re doing and he said go ahead with it.”

Speaking to the details of the deal, Trump named some of the investors, including Rupert Murdoch and Mike Lindell. Vice President J.D. Vance said more information about the other investors will be announced in the coming days.

Vance added that TikTok will be valued at $14 billion.

Asked if TikTok will begin to favor “MAGA” content, Trump said it will be fair.

“If I could make it 100% MAGA I would but it’s not going to work out that way unfortunately,” Trump said. “Everyone is going to be treated fairly. Every group, every philosophy will be treated fairly.”

The executive order says the president will have the authority to determine that TikTok has undergone a “qualified divestiture” through an interagency process. If the president makes this determination, the act’s prohibitions can be removed.

The deal will bring TikTok into compliance with the law passed by U.S. Congress last year requiring it to be owned and operated by a U.S. company. Congress passed the law out of concern that the application posed a national security threat, due to ByteDance being based in China.

There is still more information to come about the agreement between the United States, ByteDance and China. The executive order has been signed but it will take weeks to months for the divestiture and formation of the new TikTok corporate structure to be complete, said Norman Bishara, professor of business law and ethics in the Stephen M. Ross School of Business at Michigan.

“The devil is in the details,” Bishara said. “Until we really see this in writing and have all the details it’s hard to fully assess if they are complying with the letter of the law and the spirit of what Congress wanted in the first place.”

The White House stated the federal government will not play a role in selecting members for TikTok’s board, but the president’s role in brokering the agreement is “extraordinary,” Bishara said.

“Even without the direct control of the U.S. government or the ‘golden share’ that’s been discussed, it still seems a safe bet that the folks on the U.S. side like Silver Lake [Technology Management] and Oracle are aligned with the interest of the government and the Trump administration,” he said.

Andrew Verstein, professor of law at UCLA, told UPI the TikTok deal responds to concerns expressed by Congress, localizing operations in the United States. However, the inherent nature of its algorithm will still require data to cross borders.

“We were worried that a Chinese-owned and Chinese-controlled company with a pretty complicated technical architecture was up to bad things. So we passed a law,” Verstein said. “What we got was a compromise. The company is going to be largely owned by Americans and partially controlled by Americans, but not fully owned and controlled by Americans. So this is a compromise between those two visions and in some ways it’s worse than both things.”

Verstein said the new concern that the deal creates is that the perceived “bad things” that Congress and national security experts worried about China doing — surveillance, propaganda campaigns and misinformation — will be continued under American control.

“Granting Americans equity in the company gives them a greater incentive to do whatever is most profitable, including whatever was happening before,” he said. “It tempts them but you’re happy with that if you’re handing money out to your friends.”

TikTok creators, business owners and advertising firms have watched the ongoing saga closely as threats of the application shutting down in America have persisted for five years.

“Everybody will be very happy that the deal is done and things are settling in a final state,” Evan Horowitz, co-founder and CEO of Movers+Shakers, a marketing agency focused on social media, told UPI. “It’s been five years now that TikTok has been in this state of uncertainty and that’s been stressful for people. That’s been stressful for brand assessment, stressful for creators, stressful for consumers, because there’s this constant threat of TikTok going away.”

As Horowitz expresses relief, he remains concerned about whether the application will remain largely as it is.

“The algorithm is the number one key to TikTok’s success,” he said. “So what happens to the algorithm and how they’re able to port that or share that is going to be critical for the long-term viability of TikTok.”

The makeup of the new board also raises questions.

“One of the keys to TikTok’s success is that it’s an open and inclusive platform and that has attracted a very wide and diverse audience over the years,” Horowitz said. “If in the future it seems like TikTok will not be inclusive and open to all people and viewpoints that would present a major challenge for the community.”

As Horowitz’s company has navigated the years of uncertainty around TikTok, he said he has encouraged clients to stay focused on what is known rather than unknown. In the meantime he has monitored alternatives to the platform as social media platforms tend to come and go over time.

“Our expectation is if TikTok were either to vanish or dwindle gradually, the winners are going to be Instagram Reels and YouTube Shorts,” he said. “They’re still not quite as good and the audience is not as robust but if people start being dissatisfied with TikTok for any reason, they’re going to be moving to Reels and Shorts.”

Sept. 23 (UPI) — The Wall Street Journal filed a motion Monday to dismiss President Donald Trump‘s $10 billion defamation lawsuit over the newspaper’s reporting on a 50th birthday letter he claims he did not write to Jeffrey Epstein more than two decades ago.

According to the filing, The Journal argued the case should be thrown out because “the article is true.”

“Epstein’s estate produced the Birthday Book, which contains the letter bearing the bawdy drawing and Trump’s signature, exactly as The Wall Street Journal reported.”

“While this case’s threat to the First Amendment is serious, the claims asserted by President Trump are meritless and should be promptly dismissed with prejudice,” the newspaper said.

Trump has denied writing the letter, saying, “This is not me,” and “This is a fake thing.” He is asking for $10 billion on two counts of defamation, which could total more than $20 billion.

The Journal’s filing asks the court to order Trump pay the defendants’ attorneys’ fees. The newspaper argues the article is not defamatory.

“Even if it had reported that President Trump personally crafted the letter — and it does not — there is nothing defamatory about a person sending a bawdy note to a friend,” according to the motion, which detailed the note that included a drawing of a naked woman.

Trump disagreed.

“The Wall Street Journal and News Corp. owner Rupert Murdoch, personally, were warned directly by President Donald Trump that the supposed letter they printed by President Trump to Epstein was a FAKE and, if they print it, they will be sued,” Trump wrote in a post on Truth Social in July. “The press has to learn to be truthful and not rely on sources that probably don’t even exist.”

The Wall Street Journal’s motion to dismiss comes days after a federal judge threw out a $15 billion lawsuit, also filed by the president, against The New York Times. The judge called Trump’s allegations “superfluous.”

Last year, Trump won a $15 million settlement from ABC News in a defamation suit against the network over false statements. Trump also won a $16 million settlement from CBS News over what he called deceptively edited comments during the presidential election.

Two days after solidifying control of his family’s empire, Fox Corp. Chief Executive Lachlan Murdoch touted the strength and newfound stability of their media business.

Murdoch spoke briefly Wednesday at the Goldman Sachs Communacopia + Technology Conference, a fireside chat cut short because of Murdoch’s late arrival in San Francisco thanks to a weather delay. Instead of speaking for about 40 minutes, Murdoch appeared for just about 10 minutes.

The session followed this week’s $3.3-billion settlement of the Murdochs’ bitter succession feud, which handed Lachlan the keys to the kingdom. Rupert Murdoch’s trust will be replaced with new ones that benefit his six children. In the coming weeks, the family’s controlling News Corp. and Fox shares will pass from Rupert to Lachlan, sealing the scion’s status as one of the world’s most influential moguls.

The 54-year-old executive already was overseeing Fox News, the Fox broadcast network and the free video service Tubi as CEO of Fox since 2019. As chairman of News Corp., Lachlan Murdoch is perched atop the publishing firm that includes the Wall Street Journal, New York Post, the Times of London, HarperCollins publishing house and newspapers in his family’s native Australia. Now his inheritance and legal standing is etched through 2050.

“It’s great news for investors,” Murdoch said of the family settlement. “It gives us a clarity about our strategy going forward — and shows that our strategy will be consistent.”

The settlement was reached after months of negotiations among representatives of Rupert Murdoch’s children. Three of his offspring — Prudence MacLeod, Elisabeth Murdoch and James Murdoch — had tried to block the elder Murdoch’s plan to consolidate Lachlan’s power — sending the dispute to a Nevada probate court.

Prudence, Elisabeth and James agreed to surrender their shares and abandon any future involvement in the companies in exchange for $1.1 billion apiece.

Analysts said they don’t expect major changes at Fox, particularly at Fox News, which will continue its conservative drumbeat and support of President Trump.

“We expect the strategy will likely stay the course,” Robert Fishman, a MoffettNathanson research analyst, wrote in a report. “Fox’s emphasis on its differentiated linear assets — namely sports and Fox News — should continue while at the same time balance a streaming push with its recently-launched Fox One and rapidly growing Tubi.”

During the Goldman Sachs conference, Murdoch sounded an upbeat note about last month’s launch of its latest streaming service, Fox One, which delivers news and sports to consumers.

“I don’t want to read too much into our success and our data of the last few weeks but suffice to say its take-up [rate] has exceeded our expectations,” Murdoch said.

Fox One will be part of a streaming bundle with ESPN next month. “We think it’ll be … the essential sports bundle for sports fans in America,” Murdoch said.

Murdoch has been running Fox since 2019 after Rupert Murdoch sold the bulk of the company’s entertainment assets to the Walt Disney Co., in a $71-billion deal which provided Murdoch’s children with a payout of about $2 billion each. At the time, Rupert Murdoch wanted to simplify his company and pave the succession path for Lachlan.

Murdoch noted that resolving the family control issue carried other side benefits, including smoothing the application process for state gaming licenses for the online sports wagering business, FanDuel. Fox has options to take a minority stake in that enterprise.

Rupert Murdoch sought to cement Lachlan’s control as a way to preserve the conservative leanings of his media empire after he is gone.

The 94-year-old patriarch has long viewed Lachlan as his natural heir, in part because his oldest son is the most ideologically in sync with him.

Rupert had become increasingly troubled by the more liberal attitudes of three of his older children, particularly James, who has been outspoken in his disdain of Fox News.

Rupert Murdoch and Lachlan Murdoch at the 2018 Allen & Co. Media and Technology Conference in Sun Valley, Idaho.

(Bloomberg/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

Fox shares have fallen about 8% since Monday when the settlement was announced, after the company said the Murdochs planned to price the shares they would sell at $54.25. Shares were trading at $52 on Wednesday.

The closely watched Murdoch succession drama has ended with a $3.3-billion settlement that gives Lachlan Murdoch control of the family’s influential media assets, including Fox News, the New York Post and the Wall Street Journal.

Fox Corp. on Monday announced the “mutual resolution” of the legal wrangling that had clouded the future direction of the television company and the Murdoch-controlled publishing firm News Corp. The dollar figure was confirmed by a person familiar with the matter who was not authorized to comment publicly.

The succession dispute flared into public view last year after three of Murdoch’s children attempted to block proposed changes that patriarch Rupert Murdoch wanted to make to his trust to cement his oldest son Lachlan’s grip on power. In December, a Nevada probate commissioner rejected Rupert Murdoch’s request to amend his trust amid the opposition by his three adult children.

The 94-year-old mogul wanted to ensure the conservative leanings of his media empire would carry on and felt that Lachlan Murdoch, who serves as chairman and chief executive of Fox, was the most ideologically compatible with his own point of view.

Until now, Rupert’s four oldest children — Prudence MacLeod, Elisabeth Murdoch, Lachlan Murdoch and James Murdoch — were set to jointly inherit control of the businesses. But, as part of the settlement, Prudence, Elisabeth and James agreed to relinquish their shares in the family trust and give up any roles going forward.

Two new trusts will be established. One will benefit Lachlan Murdoch and Rupert Murdoch’s two youngest daughters, Chloe and Grace Murdoch, who were born during his union with ex-wife Wendi Deng.

The second trust will benefit Prudence, Elisabeth, James and their descendants. Fox Corp. separately announced a public offering of 16.9 million shares of Fox Corp. stock, currently held by the Murdoch Family Trust.

Those proceeds, along with the sale of 14.2 million shares of publishing company News Corp.’s Class B common stock, will fund the new trust.

Fox said Monday that voting control of the Fox and News Corp. shares held by this trust “will rest solely with Lachlan Murdoch through his appointed managing director” through 2050.

“Fox’s board of directors welcomes these developments and believes that the leadership, vision and management by the Company’s CEO and Executive Chair, Lachlan Murdoch, will continue to be important to guiding the Company’s strategy and success,” the board said in a statement.

Fox said it is not selling any of its stock.

The family will sell nonvoting Class B shares and hold on to its voting shares — and control. Rupert Murdoch will remain the company’s chairman emeritus.

During a six-month period following the stock sales, James, Prudence and Elisabeth will be expected to “sell their de minimis personal holdings in FOX and News Corp.” to severe all ties with the companies.

A federal judge has rejected Newsmax’s lawsuit alleging Fox News violated U.S. antitrust laws by squeezing out rival conservative news networks.

The court’s decision came two days after the case was filed.

However, U.S. District Court Judge Aileen M. Cannon said she would give Newsmax a do-over. The Boca Raton, Fla.-based network has until Thursday to refile its lawsuit against Rupert Murdoch’s media company and top-rated cable news network to comply with judicial style.

In her two-page ruling on Friday, Cannon said Newsmax’s lawyers inappropriately tried to build their case by stringing together allegations to compound their effect.

“We understand this is just a technical matter and our law firm is refiling,” Newsmax said in a statement.

Newsmax sued Fox News and its parent Fox Corp. on Wednesday, accusing Murdoch’s television company of anticompetitive behavior to maintain its “unlawful monopolization of the right-leaning pay TV news market.”

Lawyers for Newsmax alleged Fox used its market clout to discourage pay-TV distributors from carrying or promoting Newsmax and other rival conservative news outlets. Newsmax claimed Fox News resorts to intimidation campaigns, including by pressuring guests not to appear on Newsmax.

“But for Fox’s anticompetitive behavior, Newsmax would have achieved greater pay TV distribution, seen its audience and ratings grow sooner, gained earlier ‘critical mass’ for major advertisers and become, overall, a more valuable media property,” Newsmax said in its lawsuit.

Fox News scoffed at the allegations.

“Newsmax cannot sue their way out of their own competitive failures in the marketplace to chase headlines simply because they can’t attract viewers,” the company said in a statement.

Murdoch’s company declined further comment on Friday.

The Trump-appointed judge wrote that Newsmax’s lawsuit was structured as a “shotgun pleading” — a complaint that contains “multiple counts where each count adopts the allegations of all preceding counts.”

Should Newsmax try again, it must untangle its arguments.

“Each count must identify the particular legal basis for liability and contain specific factual allegations that support each cause of action within each count,” Cannon wrote.

Underdog conservative channel Newsmax is challenging Rupert Murdoch’s dominant Fox News in court.

Newsmax sued Fox News parent firm Fox Corp. Wednesday, accusing Murdoch’s television company of anti-competitive behavior designed to squeeze rivals to maintain its “unlawful monopolization of the Right-leaning Pay TV News Market.”

Fox has “engaged in an exclusionary scheme to increase and maintain its dominance in the market … resulting in suppression of competition in that market that harms consumers, competition and Newsmax Broadcasting,” the Boca Raton, Fla., firm said in its federal lawsuit filed in Miami.

Politically conservative news is big business, and Murdoch has mined that lucrative niche since launching Fox News in 1996 with network architect Roger Ailes. Newsmax launched as an alternative nearly two decades later, in 2014. By that time, Fox News was well established as the go-to outlet for Republicans and other political conservatives.

In its 31-page complaint, Newsmax accused Fox of using its market clout to discourage pay-TV distributors from carrying or promoting Newsmax and other rival conservative news outlets. Fox allegedly imposed “financial penalties on distributors if they carry Newsmax” in basic cable packages, and other obstacles, including charging higher fees or requiring carriage of “little-watched channels like Fox Business,” according to the lawsuit.

“But for Fox’s anticompetitive behavior, Newsmax would have achieved greater pay TV distribution, seen its audience and ratings grow sooner, gained earlier ‘critical mass’ for major advertisers and become, overall, a more valuable media property,” Newsmax said in its lawsuit.

Newsmax became a publicly traded company earlier this year. It raised $75 million through its initial public offering, but its stock, which entered the market at about $83 a share, closed Wednesday down nearly 1% to $13.86.

Fox News scoffed at the lawsuit.

“Newsmax cannot sue their way out of their own competitive failures in the marketplace to chase headlines simply because they can’t attract viewers,” the network said in a statement.

Newsmax, in its complaint, argued that Fox throws its weight around when striking deals with digital media platforms, including Hulu + Live TV, DirecTV+, Sling TV and YouTube TV, which now make up about 30% of the pay-TV market. As a result, some pay-TV providers have little incentive to carry or promote Newsmax, the lawsuit alleges.

Fox’s commanding position has allowed the company to extract “supra-competitive carriage fees,” according to Newsmax. Fox charges pay-TV distributors nearly $2.20 per subscriber per month to carry Fox News. That’s double CNN’s fees and about six times MSNBC’s carriage fee, Newsmax said.

“These inflated costs have been or likely will be passed on to consumers,” Newsmax said in a statement.

Fox News consistently beats CNN and MSNBC in the Nielsen ratings. It was the No. 1 traditional TV network overall in July, beating ABC, NBC and CBS, according to Nielsen.

Newsmax also alleged Fox News resorts to intimidation campaigns, including pressuring guests not to appear on Newsmax. “It also hired private investigators targeting Newsmax executives to damage the company’s credibility,” according to a Newsmax statement.

Newsmax, in its lawsuit, contends the market is not the universe of cable news channels, including CNN and MSNBC. Instead, it contends the politically conservative news space is a market unto itself, controlled almost entirely by Fox.

“Right-leaning pay TV news has been a cornerstone of American television, drawing tens of millions of viewers who identify with, or prefer, right-leaning perspectives on politics, current events, and cultural debates,” the Newsmax lawsuit said.

“A large segment of consumers of political news and media seeks news, commentary, and analysis that aligns with or speaks to their political viewpoints,” the lawsuit said. “These right-leaning viewers treat other right-leaning news channels as their next best substitute — and do not consider left-leaning news outlets as adequate substitutes for right-leaning news channels.”

Newsmax is seeking a jury trial and unspecified financial damages. It also wants a judge to declare Fox’s conduct unlawful under the Sherman Act and Florida’s anti-competition laws and prevent Fox from striking exclusionary contracts.

“This lawsuit is about restoring fairness to the market and ensuring that Americans have real choice in the news they watch,” Newsmax Chief Executive Christopher Ruddy said in a statement.

President Trump has dropped his demand that Rupert Murdoch immediately testify in the president’s libel lawsuit over a Jeffrey Epstein story in the Wall Street Journal, but the 94-year-old media mogul has agreed to provide his health information.

Trump initially demanded Murdoch sit for a deposition within 15 days to answer questions about the Epstein story, citing Murdoch’s advanced age and various health complications.

But the warring sides reached a truce, agreeing that Murdoch instead would provide “a sworn declaration describing his current health condition,” according to a joint stipulation filed in U.S. District Court in Miami late Monday.

“Defendant Murdoch has further agreed to provide regularly scheduled updates to the plaintiff regarding his health, including a mechanism for him to alert [Trump] if there is a material change in his health,” according to the stipulation.

Late last month, the president sued Murdoch, News Corp. and Journal publisher Dow Jones & Co. after the paper published a story describing a raunchy birthday greeting that Trump allegedly sent Epstein in 2003 to mark the convicted child sex offender’s 50th birthday. The article said the letter included a sketch of a naked woman, featuring breasts and a squiggly “Donald” signature.

Trump has denied sending the letter, which he said was “fake.” The Journal said the letter was one of dozens of birthday greetings from Epstein friends, which his former girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell had made into a book.

Trump has said that his friendship with Epstein ended about 20 years ago and that he did not know about Epstein’s crimes.

Trump was furious over the article. His lawsuit recounted a chronology of events, saying the White House became aware of the story after a Journal reporter emailed White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt to disclose the paper was preparing to publish the story. The White House and Trump’s attorney’s immediately pushed back, saying the allegations were false.

Trump also reached out to Murdoch, according to court filings.

“Murdoch advised President Trump that ‘he would take care of it,’” Trump wrote in a July 17 post on Truth Social, the day the story published. “Obviously, he didn’t have the power to do so,” Trump wrote.

Trump sued Murdoch, the reporters, Dow Jones, its parent News Corp., and News Corp. Chief Executive Robert Thomson for libel the next day.

“We have full confidence in the rigor and accuracy of our reporting, and will vigorously defend against any lawsuit,” according to a Dow Jones spokeswoman.

Last week, Trump’s attorneys launched a startling bid to force Murdoch to promptly appear for a deposition.

In that motion, Trump’s lawyers cited the mogul’s age and health complications. They said that includes a recent fainting episode, and over the last five years, a broken back, a torn Achilles tendon and atrial fibrillation which could make Murdoch “unavailable for in-person testimony at trial.”

According to the agreement, Trump’s request that Murdoch give a deposition will be put on hold until after the newspaper owners make its case that Trump’s lawsuit should be dismissed.

“Until defendants’ motion to dismiss the complaint is adjudicated, the parties agree not to engage in discovery,” the stipulation said.

President Trump once called Rupert Murdoch “my very good friend.”

But the 94-year-old media baron, whose fortunes have risen in tandem with Trump’s political ascent, has turned into an unlikely foe.

Trump has bristled over a Wall Street Journal report that he allegedly sent a suggestive letter to sex offender Jeffrey Epstein for his 50th birthday in 2003. Trump denied sending the message, calling it a “fake,” and last month he filed a $10-billion defamation suit against Journal publisher Dow Jones & Co., Murdoch and others.

The billionaire — who sits at the top of the world’s most prominent conservative media empire — has become the focus of the president’s fury.

“I hope Rupert and his ‘friends’ are looking forward to the many hours of depositions and testimonies they will have to provide in this case,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform, a nod to “Fox & Friends,” one of his favorite TV programs. The Journal, he wrote, is a “Disgusting and Filthy Rag,” and Murdoch’s “‘pile of garbage’ newspaper.”

Trump’s attorneys applied more heat last week in a startling bid to force Murdoch to promptly appear for a deposition. In a motion, Trump’s lawyers cited the mogul’s age and health complications, which they said includes a recent fainting episode, and over the last five years, a broken back, a torn Achilles tendon and atrial fibrillation, which could make Murdoch “unavailable for in-person testimony at trial.”

Through a spokesman, Murdoch declined to comment.

The tussle provides a rare glimpse into the tangled relationship of two titans whose dealings date back a half-century when the Australian-born Murdoch arrived in the U.S. and bought the New York Post, a punchy tabloid with screaming headlines. Trump forged his reputation as a New York real estate tycoon, in part, by dishing scoops to the paper’s celebrity-hungry Page Six.

And Fox News would become one of Trump’s biggest champions. The network has long heaped on positive attention that helped Trump transform himself from reality TV star to the political hero of his Make America Great Again base.

The cable network gave Trump a platform for his unfounded “birther” conspiracies about former President Obama. And Trump’s political rise helped build Fox News into a ratings and financial juggernaut. This summer, Fox News ranks as America’s No. 1 network, according to measurement firm Nielsen, attracting more viewers in prime time than broadcast leaders NBC and CBS.

What’s more, a string of Fox News personalities have joined Trump’s administration, including former weekend host, now secretary of Defense, Pete Hegseth.

Murdoch and Trump “feed off one another — they’ve had this relationship since the ’70s where they kind of benefit from one another,” said Andrew Dodd, a journalism professor at the University of Melbourne. “But they also have these turns where they’re against each other.”

Gabriel Kahn, a USC journalism professor and former Wall Street Journal reporter, said the tension is real.

“As much as Rupert has pumped up Trump World over the last 10 years, Rupert really sees himself as the kingmaker — not the lackey,” Kahn said.

Trump’s social media posts over the years reveal bouts of frustration with Murdoch and his media properties.

The two men have different political philosophies: Murdoch is known to be a small-government Reagan Republican, “not a true conservative populist” in the MAGA vein, according to one Republican political operative who was not authorized to speak publicly.

Insiders and observers point to a series of slights, including a 2015 remark Murdoch made on Twitter a month after Trump descended on the golden escalator at Trump Tower to announce his first presidential bid, and then ignited a firestorm with anti-immigrant comments.

“When is Donald Trump going to stop embarrassing his friends, let alone the whole country?” Murdoch asked a decade ago.

Fox CEO Lachlan Murdoch and his father, Rupert Murdoch, in 2018.

(Adrian Edwards / GC Images)

Murdoch, at turns, tried to recruit or boost rival presidential hopefuls. Florida’s Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis received flattering coverage on Fox News early in President Biden’s term.

By that time, Trump was back at Mar-a-Lago after losing the 2020 election and Fox News was navigating treacherous terrain. The network was the first major outlet to call Arizona for Biden on election night, riling Trump and his supporters who viewed the move as a betrayal, one that short-circuited their claims the election had been stolen. Fox News witnessed an immediate viewer exodus.

To win back Trump supporters, the network gave a platform to Trump surrogates who suggested machines flipped votes for Biden, despite the fact that Murdoch and others knew such claims were false, court filings revealed.

Dominion Voting Systems and Smartmatic sued for defamation. Discovery in the Dominion lawsuit revealed that, two days after the Jan. 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol, Murdoch wanted to carve some distance, writing a former executive: “We want to make Trump a non person.”

In a 2023 deposition, Murdoch conceded missteps of spreading the unfounded theories. Fox that spring agreed to pay Dominion $787.5 million — one of the largest payouts ever for a U.S. libel suit. The Smartmatic case is still pending.

“They promulgated the ‘Big Lie,’” Dodd said of Fox News’ post-2020 election coverage. “Now, in the twilight years of his life, Murdoch [may be] thinking: ‘Well, this man really is not worth supporting any longer.’”

Such a shift would not be out of character. Murdoch, in the past, has promoted political leaders and governments, only to pull that support.

In the 1970s, after initially backing Australia’s then-Prime Minister Gough Whitlam, Murdoch allegedly directed his editors to “Kill Whitlam,” in a political (not violent) sense. Twenty years later in Britain, Murdoch abandoned the Conservatives after being a close ally of former leader Margaret Thatcher. He famously threw the weight of his tabloid, the Sun, behind Labor’s Tony Blair.

After years of backing Tories, the Sun shifted back to Labor and Keir Starmer last year, saying that “it is time for a change.”

“Murdoch has a long career of breaking what he makes,” Dodd said.

His vast empire, divvied between News Corp. and Fox Corp., allows his outlets to have different leanings. The Journal has lent more skeptical coverage to Trump. It broke stories about Trump’s hush-money payments to porn star Stormy Daniels and former Playboy bunny Karen McDougal. This year, its editorial board called his high tariffs “the dumbest trade war in history.”

Fox News, however, remains staunchly in the president’s camp. Murdoch is “putting one part of the organization in attack mode while keeping the other [Fox News] in reserve while it benefits from the base of the person that he’s attacking,” Dodd said.

The media baron has long relished his proximity to power. He attended Trump’s second inauguration in January and participated with business leaders in an Oval Office meeting a few weeks later.

Murdoch was reportedly among Trump’s circle of VIPs in New Jersey on July 13 for the FIFA Club World Cup soccer championship match.

Two days later, a Journal reporter emailed White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, advising that the paper was preparing to publish a story about the Epstein birthday letter, according to Trump’s lawsuit. Trump’s lawyers pushed back, saying the allegations were false.

Trump called Murdoch, according to court filings. “Murdoch advised President Trump that ‘he would take care of it,’” Trump wrote in a July 17 post on Truth Social, the day the story published. “Obviously, he didn’t have the power to do so,” Trump wrote.

Trump sued the next day. A Dow Jones spokeswoman responded: “We have full confidence in the rigor and accuracy of our reporting, and will vigorously defend against any lawsuit.”

The legal dustup comes after a string of controversial wins for the president.

Last month, Paramount Global agreed to pay Trump $16 million to settle a dispute over “60 Minutes” edits of a Kamala Harris interview, a lawsuit that 1st Amendment experts said had no merit. In December, Walt Disney Co. paid $16 million to end a defamation lawsuit brought by Trump over inaccurate statements by ABC News anchor George Stephanopoulos — an outcome derided by some 1st Amendment experts who thought Disney would eventually prevail.

“President Trump has already beaten George Stephanopoulos/ABC, 60 Minutes/CBS, and others, and looks forward to suing and holding accountable the once great Wall Street Journal,” Trump wrote. “It has truly turned out to be a ‘Disgusting and Filthy Rag.’”

Murdoch watchers don’t expect him to capitulate.

“In this bizarre world that we live in, Rupert is actually one of the few people who might be willing to stand up to Trump,” Kahn said. “Remember, Rupert loves newspapers, he loves the scoop and he loves to stir the pot.”

Times staff writer Stephen Battaglio contributed to this report.

July 19 (UPI) — President Donald Trump sued the Wall Street Journal and its parent company, seeking at least $10 billion in damages, after the newspaper published an article one day earlier about a letter Trump allegedly sent to Jeffrey Epstein before the financier was convicted of sex crimes.

The 18-page lawsuit, which was filed Friday in the Southern District of Florida in Miami’s division, names the two reporters, The Wall Street Journal, as well as Dow Jones, News Corp. and Rupert Murdoch, who controls the company, and New Corp’s CEO Robert Thomson.

“Defendants concocted this story to malign President Trump’s character and integrity and deceptively portray him in a false light,” the lawsuit, signed by Alejandro Brito of the Ian Michael law firm in Coral Gables, reads.

“We have full confidence in the rigor and accuracy of our reporting, and will vigorously defend against any lawsuit,” a Dow Jones spokeswoman told the Wall Street Journal, which noted that News Corp did not respond to its request for comment.

The Wall Street Journal reported that Trump sent Epstein a letter for his 50th birthday consisting of text in the outline of a naked woman over her signature. As noted in the filing, the newspaper did not publish the letter.

The letter was one of several published in a leather-bound album of birthday messages Epstein received as a gift that is reportedly among documents examined by the Justice Department several years ago.

“The reason for those failures is because no authentic letter or drawing exists,” Trump’s lawyer wrote in the lawsuit.

On Friday night, Trump posted on Truth Social: “We have just filed a POWERHOUSE Lawsuit against everyone involved in publishing the false, malicious, defamatory, FAKE NEWS ‘article’ in the useless ‘rag’ that is, The Wall Street Journal. ….

“This lawsuit is filed not only on behalf of your favorite President, ME, but also in order to continue standing up for ALL Americans who will no longer tolerate the abusive wrongdoings of the Fake News Media. I hope Rupert and his ‘friends’ are looking forward to the many hours of depositions and testimonies they will have to provide in this case. Thank you for your attention to this matter. We will, MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!”

On his Truth Social account on Thursday, Trump claimed the letter was fake, and said “I never wrote a picture in my life. I don’t draw pictures of women. It’s not my language. It’s not my words,” threatening to sue.

“The Wall Street Journal, and Rupert Murdoch, personally, were warned directly by President Donald J. Trump that the supposed letter they printed by President Trump to Epstein was a FAKE and, if they print it, they will be sued,” the president posted Thursday.

He noted that Murdoch told him “he would take care to it. But, obviously, did not have the power to do it.”

Trump has been pressured by his Make America Great Again base and Democrats to release files on Epstein, of which the grand jury testimony is a small portion.

Attorney General Palm Bondi said earlier this month in a memo said that much of the information is under legal seal but that there is “no incriminating ‘client list'” in the files and that “there was also no credible evidence found that Epstein blackmailed prominent individuals as part of his actions.”

On Thursday, Trump ordered grand jury testimony to be released by DOJ with victims’ names likely redacted.

Epstein died by suicide in 2019 in his Manhattan jail cell as he was awaiting trial on federal sex-trafficking charges in connection with allegations of running a child sex-trafficking ring. The memo also confirmed he died by suicide with surveillance video included through three minutes were missing.