It's crazy to think that in the immediate aftermath of a horrific event, the first thing on the minds of many in the mainstream media and on the left is to either blame/vilify the victim if they are a conservative or to point fingers at the right if it involves a mass shooting.
Yet the former is exactly what we saw play out this week after the assassination of Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk, which happened on Wednesday during a TPUSA event held outdoors at Utah Valley University.
As RedState reported, MSNBC was among the worst after news broke that Kirk was shot, with political analyst Matthew Dowd proclaiming, "[Kirk] is constantly sort of pushing this sort of hate speech, sort of aimed at certain groups. And I always go back to, hateful thoughts lead to hateful words, which often then to hateful actions."
While Dowd later issued an apology over what he said, it wasn't enough for even MSNBC, which, after issuing their own apology, fired Dowd.
READ MORE: Absolute Depravity From MSNBC After News Broke of Charlie Kirk's Shooting
Relatedly, one of the most common complaints conservatives have about the mainstream media is that they are either attributing things to them that weren't said, are deliberately misinterpreting their words and/or actions, or are taking things they said out of context, which can have the negative effect of deranged individuals putting an even bigger target on their back.
As it turns out, the New York Times is having to walk back part of what they wrote about Kirk's views on antisemitism in a hit piece they put out one day after his murder:
A hall of fame correction from the New York Times
— Nathan Brand (@NathanBrandWA) September 12, 2025
NYTs: Charlie was an antisemite
NYTs also: we got the wrong guy pic.twitter.com/xOaXzWevUV
It's unclear what statement they wrongly attributed to Kirk, as archived versions of the piece don't show it.
Nevertheless, it lent a lot of credence to the criticisms that have come from the right about how, when it comes to conservative public figures, the media's method of operation is smear first, correct later - and that's typically only when shamed into doing so, if there's any correction made at all:
It’s really hard to explain how high the editorial standards go at these places when negatively characterizing a liberal idea or figure, and how low they go when dealing with the right. https://t.co/eWvxM6VPiv
— Michael Brendan Dougherty (@michaelbd) September 12, 2025
"Republicans need to tone down the rhetoric. Also, here's a lie we told about the beliefs of a man who was assassinated for them and our correction still makes it sound like he believes them." https://t.co/Rq5dOwyIyD
— Boo (@IzaBooboo) September 12, 2025
“We accused someone who was just murdered and consistently stood up against anti-Semitism of being anti-Semitic based on a complete lie, but no big deal because we added a small note a day later.”
— AG (@AGHamilton29) September 12, 2025
The lack of standards or consequences are infuriating. https://t.co/CfGZry7wxq
If you knew anything about Kirk, you knew he was a staunch critic of antisemitism.
— Mark Hemingway (@Heminator) September 12, 2025
The right is being reflexively demonized by a bunch of people who can’t be bothered to learn whether they are as bad as they imagine. https://t.co/6tB4f4KN8i
Wash, rinse, repeat.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member