rupert murdoch is the subject of a four-part documentary that traces his rise, the family’s bitter succession fight and decades of tabloid scandal. The film, directed by Liz Garbus, assembles archive material, internal documents and interviews to sketch a patriarch who engineered a business and a brood shaped by rivalry. The documentary argues the siblings’ manoeuvrings were often overshadowed by their father and by a secret plan to lock control into the hands of one son.
Rupert Murdoch and the family’s power play
The documentary frames a central revelation as Project Family Harmony: a secret trust plan by Rupert and one son to change a family trust and strip equal voting rights from other heirs, effectively handing control to that chosen heir. That legal manoeuvre sits at the heart of a drawn-out family dispute that culminated in a court battle and a multi-billion-dollar settlement to siblings left out of the final structure. The film shows pages of documents, emails and text messages that chart the legal and personal manoeuvres behind the headlines.
Alongside the trust fight, the film catalogs long-standing editorial tactics and internal scandals from the tabloid years, including phone-hacking episodes and workplace harassment claims. Former staffers recount newsroom culture in stark terms; one former reporter remembers an editor striding through the office, tossing copy and shouting, “This is shit. This is shit!” The documentary intersperses these accounts with intimate, odd vignettes of family life — a father cheating at Monopoly, early-career subway observations of women’s magazines, and a claim about a past car accident involving a family member that the filmmakers say leaves no clear trace.
Immediate reactions
Director Liz Garbus frames the series as both a rise-and-fall portrait and a family drama that blurred business and blood. Jesse Armstrong, creator of the series Succession that the documentary repeatedly invokes, is used as a cultural touchstone to show how life and fiction have begun to mirror one another in the public imagination. Mark Devereux, the representative for one family member, is shown reacting to a memo that spiralled into litigation and settlement, underscoring the real-world consequences of internal family strategy.
Public figures who crossed paths with the operation also speak: actor Hugh Grant calls the central figure “a proper danger to liberal democracies, ” and a former reporter recounts methods used in the tabloid heyday, including a recollection of bringing stolen photographs to the desk. Those voices give the film a combative texture and underline the broader political and ethical questions at stake.
Quick context and what’s next
The documentary is presented as a four-part, deeply reported portrait that refuses a tidy moral ending: it makes clear the business stayed intertwined with family dynamics until a settlement settled the legal fight. The film highlights how succession was less a private family matter and more a long-running corporate and political strategy.
Expect legal and reputational ripples to continue: the film’s disclosure of internal documents and the depiction of Project Family Harmony will likely shape public and legal scrutiny of family trusts and media governance. Observers will watch whether remaining disputes move back into courtrooms or prompt fresh internal change, and whether the portrayal in the film alters public debate about accountability. For now the documentary leaves one verdict plain — on screen and off, rupert murdoch’s influence and the family fallout remain unresolved and intensely consequential.
