There’s a provision that says the trust structure can be changed without everyone’s consent if the intended change is in the interest of all trustees. Rupert, Lachlan and their team want to exploit this by arguing that the ongoing financial success of the media empire is dependent on it retaining its staunchly conservative editorial line, so that it is in fact (from a financial point of view) in the interest of the three non-conservative children if they don’t get to have any influence. The first judge wasn’t buying it; let’s hope that the others will rule the same way. (One argument in their favor is that the $787 million settlement that Fox News has to pay to Dominion Voting System due to a defamation lawsuit was a consequence of Rupert’s or Lachlan’s die-hard conservative messaging.)

What’s less good: I remember dimly that, should Rupert live long enough (past theö year 2030?), he can change the trust at will again.

The most staggering thing though is that the show has had quite noticeable repercussions on the dealings of the real-life Murdochs. Anyone who would like a long read on all this can check out the Atlantic article linked in the post description.

The Atlantic article that I linked in the post description talks at length about the spicy shit (especially about the family relations and only comparatively little about the legal aspects).

Thoughts on how to make this happen:

• Whenever a shopowner is already critical of Trump, call them and suggest it directly.

• Ask your local cashiers and other store clerks how come the prices rose, and whether that really is all tariffs. Again and again. And ideally so that other shoppers overhear it.

• Make angry social media posts explicitly asking the same, explicitly tagging your local store and/or the chain to which they belong, and muse about looking into their competitors.

On the same topic: https://meduza.io/en/feature/2025/04/08/russian-police-are-raiding-gyms-sweeping-up-men-for-conscription-and-deportation

There are still several good outlets, and since they’re badly needed right now, let’s not, well, shit on them.

Please let us recall the Capitol attack. It was much, much worse, targeting not cars, but people and democracy itself.

(As for Elon, it is important to recall that back then, neither he nor any other liberal magnate had free access to the oval office and his own-or-technically-maybe-not-his-own government agency. His status is wholly unprecedented.)

(Disclaimer: I’m not American.)

Not to argue for vandalism, but with the US government illegally detaining and deporting people for saying things that right wingers don’t like, I don’t think the MAGA crowd retains significant reservations about engaging in vandalism themselves – it’s just that so far they haven’t spotted a target where it would serve their cause to do so, and because, with the federal government in their hands, Republicans have much more effective and ostensibly legal methods at their disposal. (Should Republicans be voted out of power eventually, there will most certainly be vandalism from the right, conceivably even widespread violence against people, but this will probably be the case irrespective of whether Teslas keep exploding due to vandalism or only due to bad engineering.)

At this point, a perspective might be that it’s no longer about “a political goal”, but about preventing permanent loss of the ability of the people to achieve anything at all through democratic means.

Still, though: Even with this in mind, it’s utterly true that one should be careful about cheering for any such actions.