I guess it depends how a lack of Murdoch influences general trends in media consolidation around the world.
1. Newspaper consolidation in each of the markets Murdoch is now or has been in - how did his presence change that process?
2. Pay TV - would the lack of Murdoch stop the rise of a global pay tv brand? Would other parties rise to fill the void of Sky/Fox/Foxtel in the various markets? Would they consolidate?
3. The internets!
I suspect that his evaporation would change this drastically.
I'll just look at NZ as the ROW is too big for me to think about.
Murdoch apparently made his first international purchase by buying a stake in the capital's main morning newspaper (the Dominion). He did this on a whim while on a trip to NZ to travel about in a Morris Minor (according to Wiki!). He had a four way fight with locals and a Canadian press baron. He used this stake to create over the next few decades a major NZ newspaper group that consolidated the news industry, selling out in 2003.
Now if we look just at this issue - I think it likely that Murdoch won the fight because it was his first big adventure and he was close enough to NZ to make it work. A Canadian press baron might have lost it to one of the two local bidders.
Further, without Murdoch's close attention it is quite likely that the NZ newspaper market would have not consolidated so quickly, or in a manner like today's duopoly.
He then took a leading position in NZ's paytv market and still controls Sky NZ. Sky NZ is largely a rebroadcaster of of Sky Australia/UK and other Fox producers. Without a Fox/Sky in support, NZ paytv would be very different (as would sport) and might be run by the NZ/Au telcos or our local ITV equivalent, or even the state broadcaster. Without a large transnational backing, paytv would develop quite differently in NZ and be less attractive, have less money etc and the other providers might do better.