Following the assassination of Charlie Kirk on Sept. 10, many people shared their opinions online, which resulted in the firings or removal of employees, including educators.
Kirk’s notoriety tied closely to his conservative political orientation. Across all outreach platforms, he defended “right-wing populist and nationalist thinking that is central to the MAGA movement,” according to a Sept. 20 BBC article.
According to the same article, after co-founding Turning Point USA, which focuses on touring college campuses to spread conservative ideals, Kirk debated openly with community members.
Kirk’s tours and debates fueled clips online, which, according to the article, “built him a huge following — more than 5m followers on X and 7m on TikTok.”
Dr. Stu Minnis, chair of Media and Communication, said he is not surprised by the reaction to Kirk’s death from traditional media. “The more centrist and left-leaning news was quick to decry political violence, while the right-leaning outlets, particularly Fox News, seemed eager to stoke outrage.”
He said this differs from more extreme social media reactions, “but that’s pretty much always the case with any political news event.”
As of Sept. 26, a New York Times article said that at least 145 employees have faced consequences for their comments regarding Kirk’s death.
The article said that firings over controversial statements have become more common in recent years, “as online armies seek to identify and assail the employers of people who say things they deem inappropriate.”
Minnis said that in the past decade, employers have been concerned with employees’ social media presence. “Most companies now have some sort of social media policy for employees, and many of these might be viewed as inappropriate intrusions into those employee’s lives outside the workplace,” Minnis said. “It’s yet another example of unexpected consequences of an almost completely open virtual town square.”
According to a Sept. 12 InsideHigherEd article, just two days after the assassination, the article said “at least eight faculty and staff members have been fired or suspended so far for comments they made in response to the death.”
A Sept. 18 InsideHigherEd article said that while Kirk’s killer was not a student, this event “has intersected with concerns that students are increasingly unable or unwilling to engage with dissenting views,” citing the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression’s (FIRE) 2025 College Free Speech Rankings.
In the free speech rankings, FIRE said that this year, “about a third of students (32%) reported that using violence to stop a campus speech is at least ‘rarely’ acceptable, up from 27% last year and 20% in 2022.”
ABC took Jimmy Kimmel, host of “Jimmy Kimmel Live!,” off the air on Sept. 17. This suspension, according to a Sept. 18 CNN article, was due to “public pressure from [FCC Chair Brendan] Carr and ABC affiliates. The controversy stems from Kimmel’s comments from his Monday night monologue about Charlie Kirk’s suspected killer.”
According to a Sept. 22 Disney announcement, ABC would air the show on Sept. 23. However, Nexstar and Sinclair, companies that own and operate local television stations, announced that they would not air the show, according to a Sept. 23 USA Today article. A Sept. 26 NPR article said both companies would air the show that day.
Minnis said he believes the “Jimmy Kimmel/ABC/Disney/Nexstar/FCC hubbub is a fascinating case study in free speech, the First Amendment, financial pressures and incentives of legacy media companies and the shifting limits of federal regulators.” He said he has seen a lot of misunderstandings regarding the situation.
By: Lily Reslink
ihfick@vwu.edu
