Following the tragic murder of Charlie Kirk, various social media messages reacting to his death—some even celebrating it—have come under scrutiny. Conservative activists, politicians, and a website named “Expose Charlie’s Murderers” are spotlighting individuals who expressed their views online as part of a campaign to expose and potentially punish them.
Prominent figures, including far-right influencer Laura Loomer and a U.S. senator, have broadened the target list to encompass those writing on various platforms about Kirk’s assassination. This incident has highlighted the ease with which private social media messages can be publicised, making individuals vulnerable to doxxing—a practice where personal information is made public with malicious intent.
The “Charlie’s Murderers” website, which claims not to be a doxxing platform, purports to have received around 30,000 submissions about posts related to Kirk, with a selection now available online. However, many of those featured do not identify as activists or endorse violence, raising questions about the true nature of the site’s intentions.
In the wake of Kirk’s death, Loomer stated her aim to “make famous” those who celebrate his assassination, claiming such individuals risk losing their career opportunities. On platforms like X (formerly Twitter), a “Trophy Case” has been established to document those reportedly fired due to their online activity about Kirk.
After MSNBC’s analyst Matthew Dowd implicitly linked Kirk’s rhetoric to his death and was subsequently terminated, former President Donald Trump commented on the firings, referring to Dowd as “a terrible human being.” Meanwhile, individuals targeted through these campaigns report heightened harassment and fear for their safety. For instance, Canadian journalist Rachel Gilmore has expressed significant distress and reported receiving threats after her comments about Kirk.
The campaign has led to numerous public sector employees facing repercussions for their remarks. Republican politicians, including Senator Marsha Blackburn, advocated for the dismissal of individuals affiliated with educational institutions who expressed a lack of sympathy for Kirk, leading to swift actions like dismissals from their roles.
Companies have also responded by terminating employees based on their posts regarding Kirk, highlighting the complex relationship between social media expression and workplace consequences. This situation raises broader discussions around the ramifications of expressing controversial opinions, especially in an increasingly polarised political climate.
The website driving this campaign appears to aim at catalysing harassment against individuals labelled as celebrators of Kirk’s death, which could be interpreted as a form of organised intimidation. This trend reflects broader societal tensions, with the rhetoric surrounding Kirk’s murder painting various dissenters as enemies of conservative values, escalating existing cultural divides.
Experts suggest that high political tensions are fuelling disproportionate responses, reinforcing an enemy narrative that extends blame beyond the perpetrator and fostering an environment ripe for perceived threats against those with opposing views.