Murdochs Get Large Number Of No Votes In News Corp. Reelection Bids

Rupert Murdoch and his sons were reelected to News Corp.'s board of directors despite a substantial shareholder vote against them, filings with the SEC show.

On Friday, Murdoch weathered what was surely one of the most contentious annual shareholder meetings he has encountered during his decades-long tenure at the head of News Corp. Large groups of investors made clear that they are no longer satisfied with his leadership, or with his family's firm grip on the company, in the wake of the ongoing phone hacking scandal.

Murdoch's continued leadership was never in doubt; thanks to the stock structure at News Corp., he maintains enough shares to be able to overwhelm any opposition. But the size of the protest vote had been eagerly anticipated by watchers of the company. Though he pledged to release the vote totals later on Friday, News Corp. delayed the release until Monday.

The filing shows that Murdoch's sons, Lachlan and James, received the greatest share of votes against them. James, who has been deeply damaged by the hacking scandal, drew 232,013,203 no votes. Lachlan received 224,151,616 no votes. Rupert Murdoch himself received 91,798,107 no votes. That means that 35 percent of the company voted against keeping James on board; 34 percent voted against Lachlan; and 14 percent voted against Rupert. According to the Wall Street Journal, fully 75 percent of the voters who were not either in the Murdoch family or were not Prince Alwaleed, the Murdoch ally who has the second-largest share of votes, cast their vote against James and Lachlan Murdoch.

See the total vote counts in the graphic below.

Comments

[JDOK]

05:58 PM on 10/26/2011

Gee, I wonder what the New Corp shareholders were protesting? Could it be the illegal tapping of telephones to obtain "news", or the illegal inflation of the circulation of the Wall Street Journal Europe in order to charge higher rates than warranted for advertising space, or lying to Parliament, or continuing to support the lies perpetrated daily by Fox News or ...........well, you get it.

[lindabear]

01:01 PM on 10/26/2011

Send him back to HELL where he belongs!

[idisVA]

11:49 AM on 10/26/2011

NUCK FOX

[Tquin]

10:37 AM on 10/26/2011

Rupert Murdock is a world hero and has won over 70% of the vote for News Corps. Go cry your little hearts out.

[idisVA]

11:54 AM on 10/26/2011

He's engaged in criminal activity through NoTW and out enterprises of News Corps.

[pfz]

03:43 PM on 10/26/2011

What are you gibbering about? 70% of what vote has he won for news corp? Was news corp running for world hero? Those shareholders that a p1ssed at him for being nothing more than a common crook are probably liberals anyway so you know, screw them.

[CRAZEEH]

12:27 AM on 10/26/2011

DRONE THAT PRINCE ALMIGHTY WEED..........I NEED SOME GOOD WEED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!GO NINERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Karma2U]

10:05 PM on 10/25/2011

I vote to put them and everyone at faux noise in orange jump suits!

[Oonagh]

09:53 AM on 10/26/2011

I second that... All in favor... AYE

[lindabear]

01:02 PM on 10/26/2011

I thrid that - AYE

[timiam]

07:53 PM on 10/25/2011

The Saudi prince is the biggest shareholder
of Newscorps, a cartel run by the Murdoch Family.
These criminal minds got BushW and BlairT elected
and led us to the destruction of Iraq after the 9/11 Saudi hijackings.
We need to keep digging to unearth the real slyme about these villians.

[andidecker01]

11:34 AM on 10/26/2011

AMEN!

[patman77]

06:08 PM on 10/25/2011

prince al aweed is a strong buush supporter who owns over 7 percent of news corp.

[bobbiewick]

06:20 PM on 10/25/2011

So what?

[JPETERB]

12:56 AM on 10/26/2011

The 'what' is that propaganda is what Fox new buys and sells, not news. And that the non Murdock and non Saudi second class investors are being used to advance a private and personal political agenda.

[usmcqtco]

03:01 PM on 10/25/2011

A third of the shares voting "NO" is a landslide loss for the "NO" votes.

[andidecker01]

11:35 AM on 10/26/2011

Do you think for a second FoXXX will worry? HA!

[justhinking]

12:14 PM on 10/26/2011

Maybe not but 75% of shares not controlled by the family or Prince Alwaleed voting no would be landside.

[BlueDog1]

02:14 PM on 10/25/2011

I just heard a click on my phone have to go....................................

[miketothad]

02:01 PM on 10/25/2011

send this to your "conservative" pals, then watch 'em come up with a rationalization.

[Dennis Rinker]

02:24 PM on 10/25/2011

They are Democrats!

[andidecker01]

11:36 AM on 10/26/2011

Don't I wish!

[kritteracres]

06:14 PM on 10/25/2011

Mike, they'll have to run to Faux first and see what Faux tells them to think and say about the story..

[miketothad]

08:42 PM on 10/25/2011

Word.

[rvheaney]

01:56 PM on 10/25/2011

14 percent voted against Rupert thats a really close vote ! VERY close to loseing !

[JPETERB]

01:01 AM on 10/26/2011

You could easily work for Mr. Murdoch. Do you?
Here is another way to understand the majority dissatisfaction vote. Even the Murdoch WSJ could graph this vector.
"According to the Wall Street Journal, fully 75 percent of the voters who were not either in the Murdoch family or were not Prince Alwaleed, the Murdoch ally who has the second-largest share of votes, cast their vote against James and Lachlan Murdoch."

[Oonagh]

09:57 AM on 10/26/2011

He has the biggest amount of shares..it is called control.

[woody7]

01:54 PM on 10/25/2011

and?????

[andidecker01]

11:37 AM on 10/26/2011

what about 'owning the most shares' do you NOT understand?

[dejapooh]

12:32 PM on 10/26/2011

As I understand it, Murdoch owns 14% of the shares, but due to the special nature of his preferred shares, he controls 40% of the votes. so he doesn't "own" the most shares. He has used governance issues to control the most votes.

[TimFredrickson]

01:51 PM on 10/25/2011

I am amused by the fact that so much of News Corp is owned by the Saudi Prince. Does this strike any of you rightwingnutfundietalibanlibertarianteabaggers as funny? It just goes to show you what you find underneath the surface of most of the reactionary rightwing Republican corporate supporters.

[usedup1236]

02:09 PM on 10/25/2011

Timmy,Timmy...get a hold on yourself , or not. you got off your meds and started to invent new words! Never-the-less, , perhaps the prince merely wants any reported news about he and the royal family to be reported in a balanced and fair manner. You know people do not get that from the rags of the progressive,socialist, liberal rags that prevail in the haunts you frequent.

[Dennis Rinker]

02:27 PM on 10/25/2011

Timmy Clintons are the #1 recipients of political funding before and now by the Saudi's, are they the right wing?

[ppswg]

05:37 PM on 10/25/2011

NEWS FROM FOX IS NOT USUALLY NEWS IT IS COMMENTARY, WHICH I GUESS PISSES OFF MOST PEOPLE THAT ACTUALLY USE THEIR HEADS TO REASON, NOT AS A HAT RACK...IT IS AMAZING HOW A CERTAIN MENTALLITY GRAVATES TO FOX NEWS, WHICH RE-ENFORCES STUPID AND THEIR RIGHT WING BELIEFS...THEY ARE NOT INTERESTED IN THE TRUTH, THEY ARE INTERESTED AS A REFERENCE POINT, WHICH POINTS OUT ANYTHING THAT THEY CAN HOLD ON TO FOR THEIR DIM WITTED BELIEFS. IN OTHER WORDS FOR THE ULTRA RIGHT WING, THEY TRY VERY HARD NOT TO LOOK FOR THE TRUTH, BECAUSE IT IS HIDDEN FROM THEM IN SOMETHING CALLED BOOKS.

[usmcqtco]

03:02 PM on 10/25/2011

The Saudi Prince knows a good investment when he sees it. You have a problem with that?

[dejapooh]

12:34 PM on 10/26/2011

It is kind of like Jews investing in stock in Nazi owned enterprises and saying what a great investment they are...

[bump00000]

01:51 PM on 10/25/2011

He didn't loose power. The "no" votes will pay. Just you wait and see.