Rupert Murchoch’s estranged son James Murdoch has now purchased the vast majority of Vox Media, which owns New York Magazine, for reportedly $300 million through his investment company Lupa Systems. James is often described as “liberal” in his politics (too much for Rupert and the rest of his family), with supposedly moderate-to-left political views. Regardless, however, of his intentions or political views, he is still a Murdoch, a beneficiary of his family’s global media empire. To that end, we must all call into question James’ motives.
For what happens when a single billionaire family takes control of so much of the media ecosystem, spanning outlets that position themselves as both “right” and “center,” and influence the broader narrative terrain across the political spectrum?
The idea of media serving public interest seems more and more idealistic, yet it has never been more necessary. Enlightened philosophies that argue and call for the importance of safeguarding public media, of serving the public good, of protecting self-governance and democracy. But when the media is owned by privatized, self-interested people (see Bezos buying the Washington Post, Laurene Powell Jobs’ ownership of the Atlantic, the Ellisons running Paramount Skydance, which owns CBS), this entire core part of our society is controlled by the whims of a few people’s business interests and emotional volatility.
The media ecosystem has always had to deal with the tension of wanting a “free” press and impending corporate capture. Generations of journalists, editors, and publishers continue to tell stories not only because it’s a fundamental contribution to society, but also to expose important truths of our world. But since its creation, mass media, from newspapers to TikTok, has relied on corporate advertising, which makes it extremely susceptible to propaganda, censorship,and the deliberate manipulation of public opinion. And the more the government and society are tied to ultra-extractive capitalism, the less “free” the press is.
We can look at corporate sponsorship and ads since the early 1900s, followed by the “Godfather of PR’ Edward Bernays’ propagation of how messaging can manipulate minds, to understand how advertising serves government and corporate interests. In George Orwell’s prophetic book 1984,the media is purposefully designed to eliminate truth itself, which leads to a nightmare of surveillance and full-spectrum domination.
So if “leftist” like James Murdoch is supposed to mean generally supporting more societal equality, less racism, less wealth inequality, less corporate wealth and power, but the person is benefiting from the exact opposite (more racism and wealth inequality), it begs the question: Can we trust a “leftist” billionaire whose family is funding right wing racist media and narratives to control even more of the ways we tell stories?
Democracy cannot survive without journalism. To safeguard democracy, we must safeguard the practice of truth-telling. And with it, the platforms that serve the public.
Recently, I’ve noticed the emergence of a new paradigm: citizen journalism. Eye-witness reporting, first-hand accounts, and real-time documentation of injustices are redefining what it means to report the truth.
This is what we are committed to protecting and uplifting—the right and ability of people to act as journalists: to document, archive, and broadcast their lived realities. Because the future of journalism is not only institutional; it is collective.
When narrative control is centralized, it enhances the risk of losing our freedom of the press completely. It narrows what can be said, what can be seen, and what can be imagined as possible.
No matter how liberal James Murdoch is, his upbringing will ultimately influence his politics. The most important cultural and information infrastructure is about to become the theater for family rivalry, a battleground for pride and profit. Can our democracy handle it?