The world lost a powerful voice on Wednesday. A wife lost a husband. Two young children lost their father. And the news/talk media industry lost an influential radio host, and digital media influencer. Charlie Kirk is dead at the age of 31. That’s a sentence I never expected to write on this website. His death has me sick to my stomach, saddened, angry, and concerned. I don’t normally write on Thursday afternoons, but this issue was too important to set aside until Monday.
What happened in Utah on Wednesday was senseless. Charlie Kirk was doing what he loved, debating and discussing ideas with young people. Whether they agreed with his positions or not, discourse and debate was encouraged. Charlie welcomed opposing views, and traveled to numerous campuses to elevate conversation.
Hearing and challenging each other is a good thing. Kirk did it well. It forces us to sharpen and defend our views, learn from each other, and find common ground with those we disagree with. The world is full of people with different experiences, backgrounds, and values. Certain parts of the country operate differently. Some people loved what Charlie Kirk stood for, others hated it. Regardless, we should be able to discuss issues in a civil manner.
Barrett Media moved into news media in 2020, and during those 5 years I never met or spoke to Charlie Kirk. I admired though how he juggled radio, television, podcasting, and social media successfully. I even wrote a column on what the media business could learn from his college tour. He was a gifted communicator who energized millions to get involved. His ability to connect with people across all platforms, welcome face to face debate, and generate massive amounts of interest was impressive. He was prepared to defend his positions, a skill you must possess to be a successful on-air talent.
When I learned of the shooting, I immediately thought of Phil Boyce, David Santrella, Mike Gallagher and Scott Jennings. Imagine going to work at Salem Media on Wednesday and learning in real time that one of your friends, co-workers, and future stars was just assassinated at a public event. You have to cover the story in real time while being emotionally wrecked. Given the personal connections to Charlie’s family and friends, I can’t imagine how painful this week’s broadcasts have been for the Salem team. My condolences to all who knew and worked with Charlie.
Aside from the personal connections, I also monitored multiple networks, websites, and social media accounts to see how the story was being covered. Most handled things properly but a few made dangerous errors.
At MSNBC, almost immediately after Kirk was shot, Matthew Dowd went on the air and said, “We don’t know any other details of this that we don’t know if this was a supporter shooting their gun off in celebration or so. We have no idea about this. But following up on what was just said, he’s been one of the most divisive, especially divisive younger figures in this who is constantly sort of pushing this sort of hate speech or sort of aimed at certain groups. I always go back to hateful thoughts, lead to hateful words, which then lead to hateful actions. And I think that’s the environment we’re in that that people just you can’t stop with these sort of awful thoughts you have and then saying is off of words and not expect awful actions to take place. And that’s the unfortunate environment we’re in.”
Dowd posted an apology on BlueSky, writing, “My thoughts & prayers are w/ the family and friends of Charlie Kirk. On an earlier appearance on MSNBC I was asked a question on the environment we are in. I apologize for my tone and words. Let me be clear, I in no way intended for my comments to blame Kirk for this horrendous attack. Let us all come together and condemn violence of any kind.”
Speaking to the general public on a platform like MSNBC is a privilege. When used irresponsibly, that privilege gets taken away. Dowd learned that Wednesday evening. You can’t say what Dowd did right after a popular figure has been shot dead. I don’t like seeing media people lose jobs but MSNBC President Rebecca Kutler made the right call. A company statement said, “During our breaking news coverage of the shooting of Charlie Kirk, Matthew Dowd made comments that were inappropriate, insensitive, and unacceptable. We apologize for his statements, as has he. There is no place for violence in America, political or otherwise.”
That’s how things should be handled when broadcasters make indefensible mistakes. There are times when you have to push division aside. It’s especially important in the seconds and minutes after someone’s death. If you can’t be classy or respectful, say nothing or just try not to be an asshole. It’s really not that hard. Think of how you’d feel if the person assassinated was a co-worker, and on-air rhetoric from a competitor was distasteful right after they died. It would change how you see and discuss the story.
Across social media, Kirk’s fans and colleagues expressed sorrow over his death. Megyn Kelly, Sage Steele, and Glenn Beck became emotional over the news. Folks who disagreed with Kirk like Chris Cuomo, Jake Tapper, Brian Stelter were classy with their responses. All struck the right tone with their commentary.
Some who work in music radio circles couldn’t resist the opportunity to use it to draw attention to other matters. There were complaints over Kirk’s death receiving more attention than other news stories. Others used it as an opportunity to beat the drum for changing gun laws. Some even pushed back on paying respect.
Given the unstable media climate we’re in, I don’t understand why some risk their jobs over having to chip in on social media. People sometimes think that their social media accounts aren’t the same as their airwaves. That’s false. The second you post it, assume it could be on television or on the front page of the newspaper.
At TMZ, the newsroom had people cheering seconds before Kirk was officially pronounced dead. TMZ claims the cheering was related to a car chase, not Charlie’s death. Many aren’t buying it. I initially gave them the benefit of the doubt but this doesn’t look good. Neither does this.
One sports media situation was brought to my attention Thursday night. JT The Brick’s producer Bobby Machado posted disgusting remarks that resulted in termination. He shut down his account on X but the damage was already done.
The worst though came from Comedian Darius Dinkins. His commentary was defenseless. I can’t imagine SiriusXM bosses will be rushing to air comedy specials for Dinkins when he says he was giddy about Kirk dying. An Associate Dean at Middle Tennessee University was fired for insensitive comments following Kirk’s death. They pale in comparison to what Dinkins said on video.
Social media algorithms have circulated videos for the past 24-hours showing college kids, lowlifes, and business owners celebrating Charlie Kirk’s demise. What each individual failed to think about but soon will is how it will effect them moving forward. Your words and reactions on social media can have permanent consequences.
As I think about Charlie Kirk’s death, three things are consuming my thoughts.
#1 – Why is it acceptable for video clips to be available on social media showing someone dying? 10 hours after Kirk was shot dead, clips were accessible all over X. How is that healthy for society? TV didn’t show the clip repeatedly yet X had every angle including some which showed blood pouring out of Kirk’s neck and his body being carried out.
In the hours that have followed, more and more clips have gone viral showcasing the worst of humanity. The behavior is amplified by platforms rather than denounced and removed. Our world’s addiction to phones and social media have turned everything into ‘content’. The rush to generate views and engagement has replaced sensitivity, compassion, and common sense. Chad Withrow’s post yesterday on this was spot on.
I wonder if social media in 2025 does more harm than good for the world. We used to have discussions with friends, co-workers and neighbors without knowing their every thought. Now, every single post shapes how we see people. As much as I love staying connected and learning things, I also see the worst of people elevated far too often. Something has to change.
#2 – After Donald Trump was shot, he gave speeches behind bullet proof glass enclosures. Kirk was out in the open in Utah just like Trump was in Butler, PA. It made him an easy target. We may want things to be normal, but sick people do sick things. Is the risk worth it for high profile political figures to speak without being shielded? Tucker Carlson did live shows last year. Megyn Kelly has an upcoming tour which Kirk was supposed to appear at. Can they afford to stand on a stage unprotected?
I’ve spent the past 24-hours thinking about last week’s BNM Summit. Glenn Beck, Scott Jennings, Chris Ruddy, Curtis Sliwa, and John Catsimatidis graced our stage. Access to them in the theater was easy. At our past shows, Clay Travis, Brian Kilmeade, Tomi Lahren, Jason Whitlock, and others have joined me. Never have I held an event and worried about being shot on stage while discussing broadcasting. But maybe I’ve been foolish to not consider that possibility. If people have to fear doing what they love, and minimize interacting, what’s the point of it?
#3 – How many on-air professionals hurt themselves professionally on Wednesday with distasteful posts on social media? Audiences and media owners expect News/talk professionals to discuss these issues. The same isn’t requested of music radio or sports media pros. I have nearly 5,000 Facebook connections and 13,000+ on LinkedIn. I’ve tried for years to connect with anyone who works in broadcasting but when folks pollute my page with politics or celebrating death, I disconnect. There’s little value in staying connected at that point. If they land or lose a job, we’ll still cover it though even if we’re not social media friends.
Everyone is entitled to share how they feel on social media. Just understand that your employer is also entitled to drop you if they feel your words harm their brand. I saw a great post on Facebook from voice talent Jessica Marz. It said, “Think before you post today, and everyday. Is it worth it? Do you really mean it? Are you going to delete it and hope no one that really matters to you, read it? It takes a millisecond to snap a photo of post. Don’t ruin your reputation, your career and your relationships by firing off a nasty comment that for a second, makes you feel powerful.”
I also saw posts on Wednesday night from the New York Yankees and Pat McAfee that struck the right tone. Stephen A. Smith delivered the right messaging on Thursday too. Jen Psaki on MSNBC meanwhile wasted no time shifting the focus to President Trump’s remarks, making it about his language and a potential ‘escalation’ of the situation.
You don’t have to endorse someone when they die, but you also shouldn’t spit on their grave. When people do that it shows a lack of awareness and more importantly, blackness in your heart.
We all have opinions. I have many that differ from others but I can disagree with you and still shake your hand. Hell, I have writers who I pay to share opinions that differ from mine. But they’re my teammates. I respect all of them and appreciate their perspectives. The same applies with various guests I’ve hosted at Summit’s. We have much more in common than divides us though separation grows wider each day. Finding the middle is possible if you care enough to look.
If you work in the media business and a person’s beliefs (who you don’t even know personally) move you to the point of rushing to social media to tell the world how happy you are that they died, potentially costing you relationships and employment in the process, is it worth it? How many people see what you write and make a note ‘never hire this person’? I hear it from managers often. Not everything in life requires your public response. It’s possible to change the channel or not click someone’s content. You deny them the satisfaction of a click and getting into your head when you do that.
Lastly, is it too much to expect media outlets to be less sensational when a popular figure dies? It may not be as catchy but writing “Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk Shot and Killed at Rally in Utah” is down the middle and accurate. When headlines start with “Right-Wing Advocate, Trump Supporter, 2nd Amendment Defender” etc., you’re adding color to enrage half of the audience while rallying others to celebrate a horrific event. It may boost clicks or ratings, but what does that say about your moral compass?
By the way, it has to work both ways. If what happened to Charlie Kirk involved an analyst, host, reporter or executive at an opposing outlet, would conservative folks be respectful? They need to be. Death is death regardless of which side of the aisle you’re on. When senseless tragedies occur that take the life of any media professional, we should all be outraged, not searching for ‘an angle’ to advance a story. Respect, empathy, and class are not only good for the soul, they’re good for your business.
Barrett Media produces daily content on the music, news, and sports media industries. To stay updated, sign up for our newsletters and get the latest information delivered straight to your inbox.
Jason Barrett is the Founder and CEO of Barrett Media. The company launched in September 2015 and has provided consulting services to America’s top audio and video brands, while simultaneously covering the media industry at BarrettMedia.com, becoming a daily destination for media professionals. Prior to Barrett Media, Jason built and programmed 95.7 The Game in San Francisco, and 101 ESPN in St. Louis. He was also the first sports programmer for SportsTalk 950 in Philadelphia, which later became 97.5 The Fanatic. Barrett also led 590 The Fan KFNS in St. Louis, and ESPN 1340/1390 in Poughkeepsie, NY, and worked on-air and behind the scenes at 101.5 WPDH, WTBQ 1110AM, and WPYX 106.5. He also spent two years at ESPN Radio in Bristol, CT producing ‘The Dan Patrick Show’ and ‘GameNight’. JB can be reached on Twitter @SportsRadioPD or by email at Jason@BarrettMedia.com.
Spot. On.
An eloquent analysis.
👏
Well said.