The first family of news — commanding a stable that includes Fox News, The Wall Street Journal and a host of British and Australian media — had been the inspiration for the hit TV series “Succession.”

Like the fictional version, this real-life fight pitted the children of a powerful patriarch against each other for who should be the face and the voice of the empire after the old man dies.

Murdoch, now 93, had long intended that his children inherit the empire, and jointly decide its direction.

The eldest daughter, Prudence, has had little involvement in the family business, but at various times the other three — Lachlan, James and Elisabeth — have all been considered as successors.

But in recent years Murdoch senior had reportedly grown concerned that Fox News — the crown jewels of the collection — might drift away from its lucrative right-wing moorings after his death, to reflect the more centrist views of James and Elisabeth.

He had therefore sought to designate Lachlan — who currently heads Fox News and News Corp — as the controlling player in the wider business.

That had required rewriting the terms of an irrevocable trust that passed power to the four siblings jointly, stripping three of them of voting power, while allowing them to continue to benefit financially.

Rupert Murdoch had argued that giving control to Lachlan — who is understood to share his father’s worldview — was in the financial interests of the whole brood.

‘Carefully crafted charade’

The family intrigue played out behind closed doors in a Nevada courtroom, where Murdoch senior and his four children were understood to have given several days’ evidence in September.

In a decision filed at the weekend, probate commissioner Edmund J. Gorman Jr. said the father and son had acted in “bad faith” in trying to rewrite the rules, The New York Times reported, citing a copy of the sealed court document.

The plan to alter the trust’s structure was a “carefully crafted charade” to “permanently cement Lachlan Murdoch’s executive roles.”

“The effort was an attempt to stack the deck in Lachlan Murdoch’s favor after Rupert Murdoch’s passing so that his succession would be immutable,” the Times cited the ruling as saying.

“The play might have worked; but an evidentiary hearing, like a showdown in a game of poker, is where gamesmanship collides with the facts and at its conclusion, all the bluffs are called and the cards lie face up.

“The court, after considering the facts of this case in the light of the law, sees the cards for what they are and concludes this raw deal will not, over the signature of this probate commissioner, prevail.”

Murdoch’s lawyer, Adam Streisand, did not immediately reply to an AFP request for comment.

The ruling is not final, and must now be ratified or rejected by a district judge. That ruling could be challenged, perhaps provoking another round of legal arguments.

The complicated structure of the irrevocable trust reflects the colourful familial relationships that shaped Rupert Murdoch’s life as he built the multibillion-dollar empire.

The trust was reported to have been the result of a deal agreed with his second wife — mother of Lachlan, Elisabeth and James — who wanted to ensure her offspring would not be disenfranchised by children Murdoch had with his third wife, Wendi Deng.

The Murdoch empire has transformed tabloid newspapers, cable TV and satellite broadcasting over the last few decades while facing accusations of stoking populism across the English-speaking world.

Brexit in Britain and the rise of Donald Trump in the United States are credited at least partly to Murdoch and his outlets.