The shockwaves from Charlie Kirk’s assassination are now rippling far beyond the immediate tragedy, affecting ordinary people across the country—and some are even paying the price with their careers, according to recent reports.
From teachers and firefighters to journalists, politicians, and even Secret Service employees, the fallout has touched a wide swath of Americans. Social media posts and public comments in response to Kirk’s death are under intense scrutiny, and in many cases, consequences have followed swiftly.
Stephen King’s Controversial Tweet
The 31-year-old conservative activist was shot dead on September 10 during an event at Utah Valley University. As a close ally of former President Donald Trump, Kirk’s death sparked widespread reaction: Trump and Melania sent condolences to his widow, Erika, and their two children, while both Barack Obama and Vice President Kamala Harris publicly condemned the killing.
Yet not all responses were sympathetic.
On X, acclaimed horror author Stephen King criticized Fox News host Jesse Watters, who had argued that Kirk was not “controversial” or “polarizing.” In a now-deleted post, King wrote, “He advocated stoning gays to death. Just sayin’.” After Elon Musk called him a “liar,” King issued a public apology.
Targeting “Insensitive” Posts
Shortly after the shooting, a new website called Expose Charlie’s Murderers appeared online, aiming to identify employees and students who appeared to support “political violence.” The site lists people’s names, employers, and even social media profiles. Reuters reports that some individuals have already lost their jobs as a result.
Matthew Dowd, a well-known political analyst, was dismissed from MSNBC after referring to Kirk as one of the “most divisive” figures in contemporary politics, noting that he was known for “pushing hate speech… often aimed at certain groups.”
During a television segment discussing the environment that can lead to shootings, Dowd criticized Kirk’s past statements and suggested that his behavior contributed to the toxic climate that culminated in his death. MSNBC president Rebecca Kutler condemned Dowd’s remarks as “inappropriate, insensitive, and unacceptable,” and Variety confirmed that the 64-year-old analyst was subsequently fired.
Corporate and Academic Consequences
DC Comics canceled its new Red Hood series after writer Gretchen Felker-Martin appeared to celebrate Kirk’s death online. The company stated: “Posts or public comments that can be viewed as promoting hostility or violence are inconsistent with DC’s standards of conduct.”
Similarly, a staff member at Middle Tennessee State University was terminated immediately after posting that they had “zero sympathy” for Kirk. University President Sidney McPhee said the remarks “undermined the university’s credibility and reputation.”
In the NFL, Charlie Rock, a communications coordinator for the Carolina Panthers, tweeted: “Why are yall sad? Your man said it was worth it …” The team confirmed that it does not condone violence of any kind and reported that Rock has been fired.
Nasdaq also dismissed a junior sustainability strategist over social media comments regarding Kirk’s assassination. The company confirmed on Friday that it has “a zero-tolerance policy toward violence and any commentary that condones or celebrates violence.”
Backlash and Warnings
Researcher Parker Thayer suggested that as many as 60 people may have lost their jobs due to posts about Kirk. Far-right commentators are amplifying the backlash, with figures like Laura Loomer declaring that anyone “sick enough” to celebrate Kirk’s death will have their “whole future professional aspirations ruined.”
Congressman Clay Higgins tweeted a warning: “Anyone caught running their mouth with their smartass hatred celebrating the heinous murder of that beautiful young man should be banned from ALL PLATFORMS FOREVER.”
The rapid chain of dismissals, public shaming, and online scrutiny highlights the extraordinary tension and polarization in the aftermath of Kirk’s death. What began as a national tragedy has now sparked a broader debate over free speech, accountability, and the consequences of online commentary in an era where the line between personal opinion and public consequence is increasingly blurred.
