When Words Become Weapons: Speech, Consequences, and the Charlie Kirk Fallout

WEBVTT
00:00:02.021 --> 00:00:04.344
I'm Ed Lavandera in Orem, utah.
00:00:04.344 --> 00:00:16.376
The sun is setting here on a horrifically tragic day, where we have seen what some are describing as the political assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.
00:00:18.103 --> 00:00:20.024
Oh my God, Go run run.
00:00:20.024 --> 00:00:22.562
He was just shot, he was just shot.
00:00:22.623 --> 00:00:34.963
When news broke of Charlie Kirk's assassination last week while speaking at a Utah Valley University Turning Point USA event, many political leaders rushed to frame the tragedy.
00:00:34.963 --> 00:00:40.353
House Speaker Mike Johnson led the chamber in a moment of silence in prayer for Charlie Kirk and his family.
00:00:40.353 --> 00:00:49.011
Speaking to cameras outside the chamber, he condemned the violence and called on political leaders to use their voices.
00:00:49.030 --> 00:00:55.570
It violates the core principles of our country, our Judeo-Christian heritage, our civil society, our American way of life, and it must stop.
00:00:55.570 --> 00:01:02.128
We need every political figure, we need everyone who has a platform to say this loudly and clearly.
00:01:03.210 --> 00:01:06.519
Of course, President Donald Trump spoke from the Oval Office.
00:01:07.281 --> 00:01:17.813
For years, those on the radical left have compared wonderful Americans like Charlie to Nazis and the world's worst mass murderers and criminals.
00:01:17.813 --> 00:01:28.629
This kind of rhetoric is directly responsible for the terrorism that we're seeing in our country today, and it must stop right now.
00:01:29.102 --> 00:01:36.813
There was a narrative in play, and nowhere was that narrative more pointed than from Congresswoman Nancy Mace.
00:01:36.813 --> 00:01:43.748
Of all the media that was happening that day last week, it was these words that stuck out the most for me.
00:01:44.260 --> 00:01:48.947
Just because you speak your mind on an issue doesn't mean you get shot and killed.
00:01:48.947 --> 00:01:56.908
In this country we have the First Amendment, we have freedom to speak what's on our mind and shouldn't get shot.
00:01:57.849 --> 00:02:04.049
Nancy Mace is running for governor of South Carolina in the 2026 election.
00:02:04.049 --> 00:02:05.933
She launched her campaign last month.
00:02:05.933 --> 00:02:15.043
She's positioning herself as a pro-Trump candidate, so certainly those words match what we heard from the Oval Office as well.
00:02:15.043 --> 00:02:30.608
On September 15th, mace filed a resolution to censor Minnesota Congresswoman Ilhan Omar and remove her from House committees after she made attacks on Charlie Kirk, specifically on a podcast interview on September 11th.
00:02:30.608 --> 00:02:40.668
She felt the remarks belittled Kirk's grieving family and also remarked that the Minnesota Congresswoman all but blamed Charlie Kirk for his own assassination.
00:02:40.668 --> 00:02:44.663
And certainly those words weren't much different from a number of people around the country.
00:02:44.663 --> 00:02:48.430
But it was Mace's comments, though, that really stuck with me.
00:02:48.430 --> 00:02:50.054
How dangerous words can be.
00:02:50.054 --> 00:03:00.111
Because when she came out to a scrum of reporters to talk about what had happened to Charlie Kirk, she was one of the first politicians to really jump on the anti-democratic rhetoric.
00:03:00.111 --> 00:03:03.443
I'm sure you've heard it, but let's continue with Mesa's comments.
00:03:04.444 --> 00:03:12.175
And I hope that every single Democrat across the country will stand up and acknowledge that they have a problem within their party.
00:03:13.260 --> 00:03:15.489
Now this is not going to be a political podcast at all.
00:03:15.489 --> 00:03:20.431
I strictly want to make this about a communication challenge that stem from it.
00:03:20.431 --> 00:03:22.768
Last Friday I hopped on Substack.
00:03:22.768 --> 00:03:24.024
I do live chats.
00:03:24.024 --> 00:03:32.681
I tend to hop on sometime between 9 am and 12 pm just to riff and have a community discussion about communication challenges that are happening there.
00:03:32.681 --> 00:03:40.342
When I went online at that time it was 11 am Eastern time and that's when we found out who the shooter was.
00:03:40.342 --> 00:03:44.806
But back to Nancy Mace for a moment the conversation to continue it.
00:03:44.806 --> 00:03:57.217
There was a measured and perfectly reasonable question coming from the chief Capitol Hill correspondent for NBC News, ryan Nobles, when he asked this question and Nancy Mace responded to it.
00:03:58.221 --> 00:04:01.950
By that logic, do Republicans own the shooting of the two Democratic lawmakers in Minnesota?
00:04:01.950 --> 00:04:03.626
Isn't this?
00:04:03.665 --> 00:04:04.110
on both sides.
00:04:05.401 --> 00:04:06.484
Are you kidding?
00:04:06.484 --> 00:04:09.151
Me, we don't know, what condition Charlie Kirk is in right now.
00:04:09.151 --> 00:04:13.776
Some raging leftist lunatic put a bullet through his neck.
00:04:13.776 --> 00:04:15.520
And you want to talk about Republicans right now?
00:04:15.600 --> 00:04:17.004
No, no, I'm asking you.
00:04:17.004 --> 00:04:19.269
You said the Democrats Democrats own this.
00:04:20.680 --> 00:04:24.230
But is there a problem with political violence across the spectrum?
00:04:24.560 --> 00:04:26.326
Yeah, we're talking about Charlie Kirk right now.
00:04:26.326 --> 00:04:29.083
That's the subject of this that we're talking about right now.
00:04:29.283 --> 00:04:31.127
Democrats own this 100 percent.
00:04:31.127 --> 00:04:40.500
Her remarks highlight a larger issue that collision between political outrage, free speech and institutional responsibility, particularly in the digital age.
00:04:40.500 --> 00:04:42.521
So those comments hung in the air.
00:04:42.521 --> 00:04:46.285
They circulated widely across all media channels.
00:04:46.285 --> 00:04:51.867
As we now know, the shooter was identified as 22-year-old Tyler James Robinson.
00:04:51.867 --> 00:04:55.951
He fired that single fatal shot from a rooftop of the campus building.
00:04:55.951 --> 00:05:00.653
He was arrested two days later and he is believed to be the only person involved.
00:05:00.653 --> 00:05:11.170
His motive is still under ongoing investigation but, as we're all hearing that he had very intense political views and that included animosity towards Kirk.
00:05:11.331 --> 00:05:18.564
He was a part of the Groeper movement, that he was a member of this far-right white nationalist, christian nationalist activist movement.
00:05:18.564 --> 00:05:31.300
It's led by Nick Fuentes and if you saw a lot of the photos that they extracted from his mother's Facebook post, there was one she took a photo from Halloween a number of years ago and she's photos of all her kids.
00:05:31.300 --> 00:05:41.370
It was a photo of Tyler squatting down wearing the Adidas black and white track suit and she said, oh, tyler's acting like some silly meme character or something like that.
00:05:41.370 --> 00:05:51.923
But it's so haunting to see that because, even though the movement's mascot is this kind of reclining cartoon frog, you've seen them as a variation of the Pepe the Frog meme.
00:05:51.923 --> 00:06:05.672
But there's so many different memes that are associated with this movement so it's pretty clear a lot of people in this group feel that influencers and activists like Charlie Kirk they call them conservatives Inc that they really don't mean what they're saying.
00:06:05.672 --> 00:06:19.644
I bring in the Tyler Robinson piece because Nancy Mace's words were so incendiary at that time and for that reporter to bring up the Minnesota assassination was incredibly tragic and jarring.
00:06:19.644 --> 00:06:30.201
But the outcome of the two you can't even compare the two and understandable from a news media sense of it that nationally most people don't know who Melissa Hortman was.
00:06:30.201 --> 00:06:34.802
They certainly do now and more people were familiar with Charlie Kirk and what he was about.
00:06:34.802 --> 00:06:38.610
But still, what happened to both of those people, those families?
00:06:38.610 --> 00:06:44.874
It was Melissa Hortman and her husband, and also another state representative in Minnesota was shot as well, john Hoffman and his wife.
00:06:45.214 --> 00:06:50.634
We have a polarized society but when it comes to opinions on Charlie Kirk people sit on one of two sides.
00:06:50.634 --> 00:06:52.843
It doesn't seem like anyone wavers in the middle.
00:06:52.843 --> 00:06:55.735
People are sitting on two sides of this matter.
00:06:55.735 --> 00:06:57.822
I don't want to get into the Charlie Kirk assassination.
00:06:57.822 --> 00:06:59.343
I don't even want to get into the two sides.
00:06:59.343 --> 00:07:04.130
I just want to get into the communication that came out of it and what we can learn from it.
00:07:04.451 --> 00:07:06.093
Very briefly, my take on it.
00:07:06.093 --> 00:07:09.165
I do think what happened to Charlie Kirk was incredibly tragic.
00:07:09.165 --> 00:07:13.403
Nobody deserves to be assassinated, but I think how it affected me.
00:07:13.403 --> 00:07:18.562
Whenever there's a tragedy like this, we always internalize it Our young people that they witness this.
00:07:18.562 --> 00:07:22.752
I worry for the youth to be desensitized to this type of killing.
00:07:22.752 --> 00:07:24.264
Both my kids watched it.
00:07:24.264 --> 00:07:47.704
I found out about it I was driving in Boston in my car when my son Connor texted me because we had been talking about Charlie Kirk in recent weeks simply because they lampooned him on South Park and Charlie Kirk's reaction was quite good, considering they were trolling him and compared to President Trump and the Department of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, who they were lampooning as well in that episode.
00:07:47.725 --> 00:07:51.259
I'm someone who thinks that he's driven more by being a media mogul and driven by what he was building and organizing.
00:07:51.259 --> 00:07:53.084
He had tremendous success doing that.
00:07:53.084 --> 00:07:55.230
But I also think he was bankrolled.
00:07:55.230 --> 00:07:58.543
I was reading his bio and he loved Rush Limbaugh.
00:07:58.543 --> 00:08:00.887
I think he was this generation's Rush Limbaugh.
00:08:00.887 --> 00:08:02.529
I don't think that makes him a saint.
00:08:02.529 --> 00:08:05.694
That makes him what he is someone who really wanted to be a big media mogul.
00:08:05.694 --> 00:08:07.283
But that's just my opinion.
00:08:07.283 --> 00:08:12.603
I also respect other people's opinions and who they follow and who they care about, so I'm not going to demean anyone.
00:08:12.603 --> 00:08:18.283
But the words of Nancy Mace that struck me as dangerous, incredibly dangerous.
00:08:18.283 --> 00:08:44.072
Now, as a side note, because I said this was going to be about communication, I don't know if many people know this, but she jumped in the South Carolina governor's race and this happened in August and it happened to be a news story that I picked up because I did a little bit of a dive on Nancy Mace in August, well before any of this happened, and she's been going through some significant stuff, so I might add in there that part of her communication efforts around this.
00:08:44.400 --> 00:08:55.149
Although she is running as a staunch pro-Trump candidate for governor of South Carolina, she's also potentially deflecting from something that's been following her.
00:08:55.149 --> 00:09:10.940
In February 2025, mace used a lengthy speech on the US House floor to accuse her ex-fiancé and his associates of really bad charges physical abuse, sex trafficking, recording sexual acts involving her and other women.
00:09:10.940 --> 00:09:25.116
She said she was going scorched earth and she alleged that in 2023, she accidentally discovered the former fiancé's files and she decided to make it very public.
00:09:25.116 --> 00:09:32.769
So it is a big situation that she's dealing with and she's also being sued by one of the guys who she because it wasn't her fiancé.
00:09:32.769 --> 00:09:36.048
It was a group of men, so she's being sued for defamation by one of them.
00:09:36.048 --> 00:09:38.267
So that's something that she wants to outrun.
00:09:38.461 --> 00:09:48.080
So, knowing that, for her to come out and make these very, very strong comments about Charlie Kirk, from a political point of view it almost makes sense why she would do that.
00:09:48.080 --> 00:10:03.903
But it is still very dangerous because our social media algorithm is defined by outrage and her immediate pivot to blame and not just Nancy Mace, president Trump, a lot of Republicans out there is a powerful communication move.
00:10:03.903 --> 00:10:06.946
It takes control of the narrative at a moment of chaos.
00:10:06.946 --> 00:10:10.469
They create a narrative, but it also raises a critical question.
00:10:10.469 --> 00:10:24.400
Specifically, if you're a communicator out there listening, where is the line between strong rhetoric, accountability and fueling division, division?
00:10:24.400 --> 00:10:25.283
Mace's call-out wasn't just rhetorical.
00:10:25.302 --> 00:10:28.912
In the days following Kirk's death, several institutions have acted against employees whose social media posts crossed the line.
00:10:28.912 --> 00:10:31.823
You could Google any local newspaper.
00:10:31.823 --> 00:10:34.129
Go ahead and Google your local newspaper.
00:10:34.129 --> 00:10:44.240
Whether you're in a big city, small town, there is going to be an article about someone in your area who was put on suspension or fired for posting about Charlie Kirk.
00:10:44.240 --> 00:10:46.630
I could almost guarantee it From the National Scope.
00:10:46.630 --> 00:10:52.469
Nasdaq confirmed it had terminated an employee who made celebratory remarks about the assassination.
00:10:52.469 --> 00:11:07.981
Ole Miss fired a staff member after they reshared an inappropriate post about Kirk's death and the Washington Post dismissed the columnist for a post that they made on Blue Sky and the paper said it amounted to quote gross misconduct and created safety concerns for SAF.
00:11:08.162 --> 00:11:14.653
Karen Atiyah came out and defended what she had to say on Blue Sky.
00:11:14.653 --> 00:11:19.988
She felt her termination was just based on the assassination of Charlie Kirk.
00:11:19.988 --> 00:11:28.152
However, what she spoke out against was political violence, racial double standards and America's response to gun issues.
00:11:28.152 --> 00:11:40.274
Now there are plenty of people out there who are criticizing her firing and she pointed out that that leaves the paper without any minority opinion writer at all.
00:11:40.274 --> 00:11:55.585
This is a troubling state that we're in right now because there are social media policies in place at companies for a reason, but then it also feels like there is a kind of a witch hunt feeling in the air.
00:11:55.605 --> 00:12:12.686
There have been several people in the US military who've been suspended or fired due to social media posts viewed as mocking or celebrating the assassination of Charlie Kirk, and many of these firings trace back to directives from the department from Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth.
00:12:12.686 --> 00:12:21.254
At least one Marine and one Army colonel have been publicly confirmed as removed from their positions after making remarks online.
00:12:21.254 --> 00:12:29.052
The Pentagon has enforced zero-tolerance policies, with dozens of service members reportedly facing disciplinary actions.
00:12:29.052 --> 00:12:37.841
However, there are also reports that some of these comments were made just in a close network, like friends only, and they weren't in celebration.
00:12:37.841 --> 00:12:38.763
They were just on the other side of it.
00:12:38.763 --> 00:12:41.445
They weren't in celebration, they were just on the other side of it.
00:12:42.245 --> 00:12:55.376
It's a troublesome time because certainly there are social media policies in place, so employees do not say things online that draw negativity back to the company, which is understandable.
00:12:55.376 --> 00:13:00.505
Every company should have a social media policy.
00:13:00.505 --> 00:13:05.514
But where does a social media policy run into free speech and opinion?
00:13:05.514 --> 00:13:08.469
I mean, because we work at a company, are we not allowed to give an opinion?
00:13:08.469 --> 00:13:20.386
And who decides if there's a post just discussing views on the assassination and the politics that come out of it and celebrating Like who makes that decision?
00:13:20.386 --> 00:13:27.308
It's a gray area and, frankly, sometimes, many times, well all times I find it frightening.
00:13:27.308 --> 00:13:31.498
Each of these cases point to the same reality that in the digital age.
00:13:31.498 --> 00:13:34.403
Social media policies are not just fine print.
00:13:34.403 --> 00:13:36.277
They are career defining.
00:13:36.277 --> 00:13:41.001
This is a time to check and see if your company has a communication policy.
00:13:41.001 --> 00:13:44.159
If you work in comms, you will want to check that.
00:13:44.159 --> 00:13:45.875
You will need to ask HR.
00:13:45.875 --> 00:13:53.182
If you are on a board or if you're in an organization that has a board, you'll have to see do they have a social policy as well?
00:13:53.182 --> 00:13:57.471
But overall, from a communication perspective, we have a communication dilemma.
00:13:57.692 --> 00:14:03.803
This moment from last week, this moment, sits at an intersection of speech and consequence.
00:14:03.803 --> 00:14:17.958
On one side, there's a clear need for accountability when posts appear to endorse violence People on staff, people associated with places, companies, institution, government, newspaper print journalism.
00:14:17.958 --> 00:14:25.379
If people are posting online that can be shared in a public space, institutions cannot be seen as condoning the behavior.
00:14:25.379 --> 00:14:26.783
That's the problem.
00:14:26.783 --> 00:14:37.750
I know that there were people thinking okay, a lot of these people are getting fired because they're very pro-conservative and they're anti-liberal or they're anti-democrat and they want to fire these people.
00:14:37.750 --> 00:14:40.518
In many cases it is a social media policy.
00:14:40.518 --> 00:14:48.562
But on the other hand, there are legitimate concerns about fairness, proportionality and whether punishment is being applied consistently.
00:14:48.562 --> 00:14:50.355
And therein lies the rub.
00:14:50.355 --> 00:14:57.418
Are we firing people around Charlie Kirk or are we also firing people when they say these about other comments?
00:14:57.418 --> 00:15:07.697
And I bet in a lot of cases, people who were fired I bet they could go through past social media posts from other employees and probably find an argument for why am I getting fired and these people didn't?
00:15:08.057 --> 00:15:16.214
I have a podcast, I'm on Substack, but also I have a roster of clients and my brain is constantly thinking about lessons learned.
00:15:16.214 --> 00:15:17.376
And what can I learn?
00:15:17.376 --> 00:15:22.975
Here's my key takeaway Every word counts and every platform is a stage.
00:15:22.975 --> 00:15:25.519
One understand the weight of rhetoric.
00:15:25.519 --> 00:15:31.360
Political figures like Nancy Mace know that language is power.
00:15:31.360 --> 00:15:33.725
Democrats shaped headlines within minutes.
00:15:33.725 --> 00:15:36.072
Two know the boundaries of your role.
00:15:36.072 --> 00:15:41.595
For employees, especially in public-facing organizations, what you say online can be judged as representing your employer.
00:15:41.595 --> 00:15:46.535
That's why social media policies exist and why they're being enforced more aggressively.
00:15:47.138 --> 00:15:50.126
Three accountability requires consistency.
00:15:50.126 --> 00:15:54.000
Institutions must clearly define what is unacceptable free speech.
00:15:54.000 --> 00:15:55.169
Apply those rules fairly.
00:15:55.169 --> 00:16:00.582
Without consistency, enforcement risks being seen as political rather than principled.
00:16:00.582 --> 00:16:05.162
And four balance free expression with organizational reputation.
00:16:05.162 --> 00:16:14.397
A workplace doesn't have to tolerate speech that celebrates violence, but it should also ensure employees know where the line is drawn before they cross it.
00:16:14.397 --> 00:16:17.227
Employees should be allowed to comment on Charlie Kirk.
00:16:17.227 --> 00:16:22.432
They should be allowed to comment on an event that is dominating news story, dominating dialogue and conversation.
00:16:22.432 --> 00:16:28.855
They should be allowed that, but employees should absolutely know what is allowed and what is not allowed.
00:16:29.056 --> 00:16:35.197
The Charlie Kirk case shows how speech, responsibility and consequences are entwined in today's communication landscape.
00:16:35.197 --> 00:16:40.754
Politicians, institution and private individuals all operate under intense scrutiny.
00:16:40.754 --> 00:16:49.758
Words posted online, words said in media interviews, whether in anger, celebration or thoughtlessness, can bring immediate and severe repercussions.
00:16:49.758 --> 00:17:01.592
The lesson for communicators from this past week is clear that speech carries weight, accountability matters, but so does proportionality and fairness in response.
00:17:01.592 --> 00:17:11.019
Navigating that balance between protecting public trust and safeguarding free expression is one of the defining challenges of our digital era.
00:17:11.279 --> 00:17:20.432
The fallout from Charlie Kirk's death shows how speech, responsibility and consequences are inseparable in today's communication environment, and that includes Charlie Kirk.
00:17:20.432 --> 00:17:24.623
Politicians, journalists, employees no one is exempt from it.
00:17:24.623 --> 00:17:33.890
So for the communicators out there, the lesson is simple but urgent Words do carry weight, policies carry teeth and accountability must carry fairness.
00:17:33.890 --> 00:17:39.221
That balance between protecting safety, preserving reputation and respecting free expression.
00:17:39.221 --> 00:17:47.297
It's the defining challenge of modern communication, and one that I think about on a daily basis and one that I hope you think about as well.
00:17:47.297 --> 00:17:54.741
Everything was so incredibly tragic about last week and there was just so many different spindles of tragedy and concern that came out of it.
00:17:54.741 --> 00:17:59.060
No matter where you fall on the political spectrum, you can't deny that it shook you.
00:17:59.060 --> 00:18:04.782
But we have to balance everything and we have to be mindful of our communication.
00:18:04.782 --> 00:18:06.740
That's all for this week on the podcast.
00:18:06.740 --> 00:18:07.547
Bye for now.