As far a biographies go, this book is short and to the point.
I think what all the readers are reacting to with the removal of 1 or more stars is the factual nature relative to the book. This book will only appeal to you if you feel that the facts of the what transpired give you a sense for the decisions that were made.
This book will not appeal to you if you are looking for insight into how people assess a set of potential options and then make a decision strategically for their company. I mean literally, you get ONLY the facts. It's actually quite horrible in that regard. All of the thinking, emotional, where did that idea come from, how was he thinking about the vision of what the organization could be, what did that asset give him is completely and entirely removed.
Example: The depiction of the purchase of the WSJ goes approximately like this...He bought Dow Jones. Then he wanted to buy the Journal. He had been asked why he hadn't done it earlier. People wondered why he didn't do it earlier. Then he decided to unsolicited. When he did it Leslie Hill didn't like it and she resigned right away. The concern was that the quality of the news would go the way of Fox.
If that isn't the absolute driest possible depiction of two major personality types with hugely strategic business minds, I don't know what is. I mean...at least do a little creative depiction about why, what the Journal meant strategically, what his plans to position Newscorp for the future, for how it would fit with the larger organization, etc. Even the research briefs from the Investment banks has more of this type of thing than the chapter presented.....SOOOOO Dry...
HOWEVER... if you are researching, you may appreciate this sticking to the facts and only the facts approach, this might be your book. It's personal taste, so for the vast amount of research that must have been involved, 3 stars.