Technology platforms including Meta, TikTok and X, They were immediately under force from any Republican legislatorsto remove drastic videos circulating online after The execution of Charlie Kirk. Most of them disappeared the next day.
Since then, the dispute over the function of social media has evolved into Anger at users posting negative reviews of Kirk online. These statements are legally permitted and mostly consistent with the principles of platforms, but outrage critics.
— The right has repeatedly spoken on the subject of content moderation and how to control any content, says lobbyist Meta, to whom we have granted anonymity due to the fact that he was not authorized to talk on behalf of the company. - Now The situation has turned and the same people say that you cannot let this kind of content.
Further string of article under video material
Another technology lobbyist said that anger over Kirk's content was the subject of frequent talks in the planet of technology lobbying on the weekend. Even any Democrats say they are worried about specified posts. “Whether this is simply a context of political rhetoric or not, technology platforms know that the increasing conflict increases engagement, and I think we request to guarantee that they are besides responsible,” said Alexandria Ocasio Cortez.
However, it is unclear what legislature could do — if anything. talker Mike Johnson told reporters last week that "Social media have been a toxin in politics" and "canned gasoline"but refrained from proposing any legislative steps.
Since the widespread removal of Conservative accounts as a consequence of the riots at Capitol on 6 January and the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic Right hand presented herself as a victim of restrictions and pressed to remove the brakes from what is allowed in online conversations. Elon Musk bought Twitter and turned it into a more free, Conservative-friendly X platform, and chaired the congressional committee on justice Jim Jordan conducted a series of interrogations to item the alleged collusion between Democrats and restrictions on content on social media.
Advocates X and TikTok did not respond to requests for comment.
"President Trump is simply a advocate for freedom of speech"
Kirk's execution deepens the divided in the Republican coalition. any leaders want to ease the force on freedom of speech by withdrawing, for various reasons, from published content — whether they are harmful to children or misleadingly advertise pharmaceuticals. Apart from the hardened libertarians who reject any concept of regulating content on platforms, it is hard to find precise dividing lines.
— There are many overlapping categories, as explained by Ari Cohn, chief technology policy advisor at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, a group defending freedom of speech. “I am not certain that there are clear factions, and I think this is due to the fact that it is so immediate.
President Donald Trump himself embodies both sides of this conflict — hindering the lives of both Republicans seeking a unchangeable direction for the organization and companies seeking a politically uncontroversial approach.
Donald Trump, president of the United States, talks to journalists. Washington, September 16, 2025.PAP/EP/JIM LO SCALZO
On the first day of his return to the White House, Trump seemed to set a clear line by issuing a regulation which read: "government censorship of statements is unacceptable in free society". And yet, in the aftermath of Kirk's murder, he made a video available on Saturday on fact Social of a individual who begs him to apply the law toprosecution of "content creators who consistently spread lies, propaganda and half-truths on the Internet".
When asked about this contradiction, Abigail Jackson, a White home spokesperson, said: “President Trump is simply a advocate for freedom of speech. Like many Republicans, He was a victim of left-wing censorship and knows firsthand what dangers it poses. And president Trump is right, aiming at extremist leftists who have for years been slandering their political opponents as Nazis and fascists, inspiring leftist force against conservatives.
Other exchanges between Republican organization members have made the conflict equally acute. Congressman Clay Higgins published on the X post in which he announced that he would force “technological platforms to order immediate life ban published all post or comment that downplays Charlie Kirk's murder‘. He was immediately responded by Republican influencer Robby Starbuck. “Charlie died fighting for freedom of speech. He would not agree to life bans on social media."
"We do not let any content that glorifies violence"
Kirk's execution occurred erstwhile platforms have already eliminated many of their safeguards against toxic content — in many cases to avoid criticism by Republicans.
“The groups that dealt with specified content were decimated,” said Nu Wexler, a consultant who had previously worked in Facebook and Google’s political communication teams. — Content moderation policy usually adapts to the ruling party [...], so in part this could be expected. However, it will be truly hard for companies to make individual decisions about drastic films.
The Meta typical shall guarantee that The company continues to take moderation seriously and cooperates with “about 15 thousand” content moderators. Regarding Kirk’s films: “We do not let any content that glorify force or drastic content,” he tells us. “This is something on which, in the case of serious violations, we inactive focus on this kind of content moderation.
