Note that the outcome of the underlying case, which is about the future of the Murdoch media empire (i.e. whether control over it will fall exclusively to conservative Lachlan Murdoch or be evenly split among all four heirs, of whom three are comparatively liberal), will be extremely consequential for both media and politics on a global scale.
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.