Simon Dumenco, media columnist for Advertising Age, said it is a "lose-lose situation" for News Corp.
"If the Murdochs are reelected to the board, the company's credibility is further trashed and the parties that have been calling for James and Lachlan and even Rupert to step down will be livid. If the Murdochs are forced off of the board, News Corp. has to admit that the whole company -- which has always revolved around the whims of Rupert -- is in disarray and now faces an incredibly uncertain future."
David Bank of RBC Capital Markets said it would have taken "extraordinary momentum" by the opposition to not re-elect the three Murdochs.
"If they remove the Murdoch board members it would be to punish the actions of past rather than react to commitments for the future," he said, adding that Wall Street is not as interested in the issue of re-election to the board.
Jeffrey Logsdon, analyst with BMO Capital markets said he agrees there was a high probability Murdoch will be re-elected because he controls over 40 percent of the vote and "the opposition has been fairly civil." He said some investors have for years resisted the notion that a family member will succeed Rupert Murdoch as chairman one day.
"Some have looked at the issues out of the U.K. as a last straw," Logsdon said. "Some just don't line up well politically with Mr. Murdoch or the Fox News perspective. Perhaps the compounding effect might make it "closer"?"
Logsdon said investors do not usually show their concern about management through elections.
"They vote by selling their stock," Logsdon said.