By:  Justin Winograd

MSNBC abruptly terminated political analyst Matthew Dowd on Wednesday following controversial on-air remarks about conservative activist Charlie Kirk, who was fatally shot during a campus event in Utah earlier that day. The decision, which came just hours after the comments aired, was first reported by Variety and has since ignited fierce debate across the media and political spectrum.

Dowd, a former ABC News chief political analyst who later ran unsuccessfully as a Democrat for Texas lieutenant governor, appeared on MSNBC as breaking news unfolded of the shooting at Utah Valley University. During the live coverage, Dowd suggested that the country’s hostile political climate had laid the groundwork for the attack.

“I always go back to hateful thoughts lead to hateful words, which then lead to hateful actions,” Dowd said. “You can’t stop with these sort of awful thoughts you have and then saying these awful words and then not expect awful actions to take place. That’s the unfortunate environment we’re in.”

His remarks drew swift backlash on social media, with critics accusing him of implicitly linking Kirk’s political rhetoric to his own murder. Some viewers, including prominent conservatives, branded the commentary as deeply inappropriate, noting that the incident was still developing and details about the shooter’s motives had not yet been confirmed.

Within hours, MSNBC president Rebecca Kutler issued a statement distancing the network from Dowd’s comments.

“During our breaking news coverage of the shooting of Charlie Kirk, Matthew Dowd made comments that were inappropriate, insensitive, and unacceptable,” Kutler wrote on X. “We apologize for his statements, as has he. There is no place for violence in America, political or otherwise.”

By late Wednesday, Dowd was out at the network entirely, according to Variety. His termination underscored MSNBC’s attempt to contain the fallout from what had become a viral controversy.

The New York Post report noted that the decision was unusually swift by television standards, reflecting both the seriousness of the remarks and the heated national climate following the shooting.

Following the backlash, Dowd, 64, released an apology on social media.

“My thoughts & prayers are w/ the family and friends of Charlie Kirk,” he wrote. “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.”

Despite the apology, the damage had already been done. Clips of his comments circulated widely online, amplified by conservative voices and outlets. Many saw the statements as evidence of media bias against conservative figures, particularly in the immediate aftermath of a violent incident.

The New York Post reported that Dowd also made an additional remark during the broadcast, speculating — without evidence — that the gunfire could have been celebratory. “We don’t know if this was a supporter shooting their gun off in celebration,” Dowd said. “We have no idea.” The offhand suggestion further inflamed criticism and was cited as an example of reckless commentary during breaking news coverage.

Reactions to Dowd’s firing reflected the polarized state of U.S. politics. Conservative commentators and media figures were particularly scathing.

Dave Portnoy, founder of Barstool Sports, condemned Dowd as a “lefty lunatic,” according to The New York Post report. In a video shared with his millions of followers, Portnoy blasted Dowd’s remarks as “abhorrent” and accused him of suggesting Kirk “deserved” to be murdered because of his political views.

“Truly an unhinged rant from a lefty lunatic,” Portnoy said. “Imagine saying somebody basically deserves to get murdered for their political beliefs just ‘cause you don’t agree with him.”

Other conservatives echoed that sentiment, arguing that the episode revealed an underlying hostility in parts of the media toward figures on the right.

On the other side of the spectrum, some liberal commentators defended Dowd’s larger point about the dangers of inflammatory rhetoric in politics, even as they acknowledged that his timing and tone were misguided. But few were willing to publicly challenge MSNBC’s decision to terminate him, given the sensitive nature of the tragedy and the perception that the network needed to protect its credibility.

The New York Post report devoted extensive attention to the controversy, placing it squarely within the broader narrative of media double standards. In its coverage, the tabloid emphasized that Dowd’s remarks came “moments after” Kirk had been shot, heightening their perceived insensitivity.

The Post report also highlighted the role of MSNBC anchor Katy Tur, who interrupted Dowd mid-segment to inform viewers that Turning Point USA had confirmed Kirk had been shot. Tur herself drew criticism earlier in the day for describing Kirk as a “polarizing” figure during the unfolding coverage, a characterization some found dismissive.

Dowd’s abrupt dismissal marked a stunning fall for a figure once seen as a seasoned political hand. He began his career in Republican politics before breaking with the party during the Bush administration. Later, he carved out a niche as a prominent analyst at ABC News, before running unsuccessfully as a Democrat for Texas lieutenant governor in 2022.

He joined MSNBC later that year, offering analysis during the network’s coverage of elections and political controversies. While known for sharp commentary, Dowd was not generally regarded as inflammatory.

The firing also reflects MSNBC’s heightened sensitivity to charges of partisanship and bias. The network, which has often been criticized by conservatives as hostile to right-wing figures, has sought to maintain credibility while appealing to its largely progressive audience.

The New York Post report argued that Dowd’s firing highlighted the challenges facing networks covering politically charged events in real time. With facts often unclear and emotions raw, even seasoned commentators can stumble into speculation or framing that fuels accusations of bias.

The controversy also reignited debates about the responsibilities of political analysts on television. Should they provide instant analysis in the midst of breaking tragedies, or should networks exercise greater restraint to avoid inflaming tensions?

Kirk, the 31-year-old founder of Turning Point USA, was a rising star in conservative circles whose death sent shockwaves through the political landscape. His advocacy for conservative values and his ability to connect with young audiences had made him a key figure in Republican organizing.

In the wake of his killing, political leaders across the spectrum condemned the violence and offered condolences to his family. President Donald Trump, a close ally of Kirk, paid tribute to him on Truth Social, calling him “loved and admired by ALL, especially me.”

Against that backdrop, Dowd’s comments were widely perceived as out of step with the national mood of mourning, further justifying MSNBC’s rapid decision to sever ties.

Matthew Dowd’s firing from MSNBC, just hours after his controversial remarks about Charlie Kirk, underscores the volatile intersection of media, politics, and tragedy in contemporary America. As The New York Post emphasized in its coverage, Dowd’s words came at a moment of national shock, when sensitivity and restraint were paramount.

The episode serves as a cautionary tale for television networks navigating the demands of breaking news coverage in a hyperpolarized era. For MSNBC, the firing may stem the immediate backlash, but questions about media bias and the boundaries of commentary will persist.

Dowd’s career, long marked by shifts across the political spectrum, now faces its most uncertain chapter yet. And for CBS, NBC, and other major outlets, the controversy highlights the peril of instant analysis in an environment where every word is scrutinized and amplified across social media