Comcast Issues Warning to NBCUniversal Employees After Matthew Dowd Incident
“We should be able to disagree, robustly and passionately, but, ultimately, with respect. We need to do better.”
Every time you think the commentariat left can’t stoop any lower, one of them steps up and proves you wrong, and that was certainly the case with former Bush-Cheney Republican turned failed Texas Democrat Lt. Gov candidate Matthew Dowd earlier this week.
As Legal Insurrection reported, Dowd was doing a segment with MSNBC anchor Katy Tur on Wednesday, amid news breaking that conservative icon Charlie Kirk had been shot at an outdoor Turning Point USA event at a Utah college, but before anyone knew that Kirk had died.
While discussing it, Dowd offered up the following commentary:
TUR: Talk to me about the environment in which a shooting like this happens.
DOWD: Yeah, and again, that’s what you just emphasized, we don’t know any of the full details of this yet. We don’t know if this was a supporter shooting their gun off in celebration, so we have no idea about this. But following up on what was just said, he’s been one of the most divisive, especially divisive, younger figures in this, who 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 then lead to hateful actions. And I think that’s the environment we’re in, that people just, you can’t stop with these sort of awful thoughts you have and then saying these awful words and not expect awful actions to take place, and that’s the unfortunate environment we’re in.
Undestandably outrage ensued to the extent that Dowd later wrote an apology on Blueksy, offering thoughts and prayers to Charlie Kirk’s family and friends while claiming that he “in no way intended for my comments to blame Kirk for this horrendous attack.”
MSNBC, too, issued an apology, saying “Dowd made comments that were inappropriate, insensitive and unacceptable” and that “There is no place for violence in America, political or otherwise.” Yet despite Dowd’s apology, he was fired that same night.
On Friday, Comcast issued a warning of sorts to NBCUniversal employees in the aftermath, referencing the Dowd incident and suggesting “we need to do better”:
The tragic loss of Charlie Kirk, a 31-year-old father, husband, and advocate for open debate, whose faith was important to him, reminds us of the fragility of life and the urgent need for unity in our nation. Our hearts are heavy, as his passing leaves a grieving family and a country grappling with division. There is no place for violence or hate in our society.
You may have seen that MSNBC recently ended its association with a contributor who made an unacceptable and insensitive comment about this horrific event. That coverage was at odds with fostering civil dialogue and being willing to listen to the points of view of those who have differing opinions. We should be able to disagree, robustly and passionately, but, ultimately, with respect. We need to do better.
Rare win from corporate media executives.
A letter was sent to all MSNBC staff admonishing them & saying they “need to do better” following Matthew Dowd’s firing for his heinous comments about Charlie Kirk.
Let’s hope that Comcast is not alone in putting MSNBC in place pic.twitter.com/GZoPFsJJIF
— Matthew Foldi (@MatthewFoldi) September 12, 2025
Dowd, meanwhile, addressed the controversy in a Substack post, alleging that at the time of his remarks, it was only known that shots were fired, not that anyone had been hit by them:
Keep in mind when the anchor came to me to comment on the “national environment” the only thing known at the time was shots were fired and there was no reporting yet that Kirk was the target or had been shot at. I said in the moment that we needed to get the facts because we have no idea what this could be and that it could easily be someone firing a gun in the air to celebrate the event. Remember Kirk is a diehard advocate of the 2nd amendment.
Whether one believes him or not (FWIW, the chyron was displaying a message that Kirk had been shot even before Dowd, who was speaking remotely, said what he did), he went on to double down in the next paragraph, throwing in a Nazi Germany comparison for good measure:
I said that Kirk has been a very divisive and polarizing figure. I then added that we are in a toxic time in America, unlike every other democracy in the world, where we have a combination of divisiveness and near unlimited access to guns. The effort by Holocaust survivors to remind folks of Germany in the 1930s #ItStartedWithWords came to my mind and I said my now legendary line “hateful thoughts lead to hateful words which ultimately lead to hateful actions”. I thought to myself how could anyone disagree with this. I guess I was naive.
Given the second half of his initial comments as well as the fact that he seemed to double down in his Substack explainer, I’m not inclined to believe Dowd. Further, I have to believe that executives at MSNBC reviewed the tape in context before deciding to fire Dowd.
Whatever the case may be, though Dowd is no longer with the network, Tur is, and suffice it to say that she sounded very different on Thursday than she did on Wednesday:
What a difference a day makes.
Just 24 hours after her disgusting initial remarks over Charlie Kirk's assassination, Katy Tur is now incredibly solemn and reflective over his death.
Clearly she got a serious scolding from her bosses at MSNBC. pic.twitter.com/0KSFJZCs6c
— Media Research Center (@theMRC) September 12, 2025
It won’t last long, but it’s something, I guess.
– Stacey Matthews has also written under the pseudonym “Sister Toldjah” and can be reached via X. –
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
I submit that the media has, in large part, helped create a toxic environment where commenters/pundits feel they can make blatantly objectionable statements in public without consequences. In addition to looking at their on-air talent, perhaps they should also be looking at their C-suites…
They don’t see their culpability. A huge pile of sociopathic narcissists (all of the credit none of the blame) infests that space. They might as well just be Hollywood’s finest.
The media, the democratic party, academics and the Ghouls at the Southern Poverty Law Center all have Charlie Kirk’s blood on their hands. Constantly calling Trump Hitler or worse than Hitler, calling his supporters Nazi’s or fascists was bound to provoke violence from their supporters. They think that anything they don’t agree with is evil or hate.
Overreach.
The Democrats’ Achilles Heel.
Comcast can virtue signal all it wants, but the fact of the matter is the sh*tlibs at MSNBC will continue to do what they want, including refusing to accept any responsibility for fomenting violence against the right.
Case in point is last sentence from a very recent article:
“The inscriptions reference fascism, obscure internet memes and video games.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/suspect-charlie-kirk-shooting-tyler-robinson-rcna230504
See what they did there?
Nice of the jerk to throw in an inappropriate use of the Holocaust. Maybe he can shove his comments up his ass.
Katy Tur(d) is now concerned about decorum. I wonder why?
I suspect she was told she would be right behind Dowd on the way out the door if she didn’t take care with her words.
If there is to be any good from this horrible event it will be to get the leftisis (well, some of them) to watch their mouths.
.
She should be fired. This wasn’t her first rodeo. Women privilege though.
She and her father are real pieces of work.
Well, I would opine that maybe she is fellating the boss. That could explain her success.
Oh, what, is it too soon to use divisive language because we need “unity?”
Progressive view of unity as you know is to say you do what I want and then we will be unified.
Since her father is a transwoman perhaps he is fellating her boss. Her father is the guy who grabbed Shapiro by the neck and threatened to end him. It was very womanly of him.
Stacy, you are way to intelligent to give any credence to Matthew Dowd’s attempt to make an excuse for his excretable statements. We knew immediate that Charlie Kirk had been hit with blood gushing from his neck and he was rushed to the hospital. The only thing we did not know immediately was that he died from his wound. Matthew Dowd knew that Charlie Kirk had been shot but he could not refrain from attacking him because he hated his political views. For Matthew Dowd to attempt to use Holocaust survivors as an excuse his vile statements just adds additional insult to his vile comments.
It’s just as bad that he said what he did even if he was completely ignorant of the situation, other than the fact that shots had been fired. He could have mentioned that fact and then expressed hope that no one had been injured. But to conclude, without facts, that something other than an attempt on Kirk’s life had been attempted, one has to wonder what may have gone through is head. “Which is more likely – that someone took a shot at Charlie Kirk or that Charlie Kirk took a shot at someone in his audience?” Obviously, given the event, there were only a limited number of probable scenarios occurring, none of which involved Charlie Kirk or one of his followers opening fire.
The tragic loss of Charlie Kirk, a 31-year-old father, husband, and advocate for open debate, whose faith was important to him…
His faith was an integral part of who he was. In fact, it was everything.
But, you can’t say something like that in this (ahem) letter of reprimand, and insult your employees. We would rather you celebrate the assassination a little more respectfully, ok?
Once again, the word tragedy is misused in place of atrocity.
This comment deserves one million likes.
So is the term “assassination.” It’s too lofty. “Murder” is the appropriate word.
Hopefully, “assassination” has higher sentencing guidelines.
imagine kamlaaa as potus
concast: we applaud the dynamic speakers who would keep hope alive
che obama foreva
“Do better” is an incredibly weak command, especially when given to people who thought they were doing fine. It won’t help.
Should be more like “shape up or ship out.”
It’s just a progressive mantra.
Like “Lived truth.”
Or “That’s racist!”
Herr Goebbels would be proud of the American media today. They have directed the hate of the entire Communist Party(Formally Democrat) against those who do not share their values.
Cities are burned, property destroyed and people are murdered.
Mrs. Kirk should file suit against all the media and Communist for what they did to Charlie. It should not be for millions, but billions. All the families who lost loved ones should also file suit against the Communists.
Get ownership and turn it into TPUSA Network.
This makes no sense. What could she sue for?
So if the media says Milhouse is a pedophile and the Communists say Millhouse is a pedofphile and they say it enough to get someome to believe it. That person takes action and kills Milhouse but Milhouse as it turns out is not a pedophile, would they not be liable for spreading a lie that resulted in Milhouse’s death.
This what they did to Charlie Kirk and Donald Trump. One is dead and one is lucky to be alive.
No, they would not be liable, because there is no direct connection between the lie and the murder. The murderer has agency, and it was his conscious and deliberate decision to commit the murder.
Also because everything they wrote about Kirk was opinion, not false allegations of fact.
But even if they’d defamed him, with actual malice, the wife couldn’t sue for that. You can’t defame the dead.
So it is a lie which at the very least is slander, the same as Alex Jones who lied as you said in response to another post.
A lie can destroy a country, a company or a single person. The liar should accountable, which in this case is the media and the Democrat Party.
1. Opinions and conclusions are not defamation. Calling someone names is not defamation. Including names like “racist”, “bigot”, and “fascist”. Defamation can only consist of specific statements of fact, that are not true. And in the case of a public figure such as Kirk, the speaker must know them not to be true. So unless you can show some specific factual lie told about Kirk, there is nothing he could have sued for when he was alive.
Jones told actual lies about the plaintiffs. Factual statements that he knew not to be true. That is the only reason they were able to prevail against him. Kirk’s critics didn’t generally say anything actionable.
2. In any case, you can’t defame the dead. So even if someone did knowingly lie about him, his wife can’t sue for it.
How many times have they lied about him over the years which ultimately helped incite the crazy person to assassinate him?
No, it did not incite anything. The definition of incitement is speech that is both (1) subjectively intended and (2) objectively likely to cause its audience to (3) immediately commit a crime. All three elements are necessary, or it isn’t incitement. By definition it’s impossible for anything this murderer heard about Kirk to have incited the murder.
Mrs. Kirk, and everyone present at the event, should give some of these news people (and celeb like S. King) the Alex Jones treatment. Arguably, Jones was sued over less than the words spilling out the mouths of some of these people. Damn, Jones was (successfully) sued by an FBI agent who claimed psychological harm was cause to him by Jones when the agent wasn’t related to any of the victims and was never present at the scene of the Sandy Hook school shooting!
Jones told actual lies, false factual statements, about the plaintiffs. Not opinions, but objective statements of fact, which he knew to be false.
Also, you can’t defame the dead.
Outhouse is flexing his pretend lawyer chops. I wonder where he got his law degree.
The truth is the truth, no matter who tells it to you. You hate the truth and reject it, also no matter who tells it to you.
So here he is clearly telling us that he has nothing to apologize for.
What a disgusting P.O.S.
Naive? You misspelled “arrogant.”
.
Of course his unspoken premise is that Kirk was a hatemonger. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Yeah, the POV was understood by all. If he had seriously not wanted to imply that, he would have made it clear. I’m sure he’s aware of the rep the Left and the MSM have.
once it was established that the left was now in control, of the msm >>schools (late 1950s at the least) that was it
all the priming that the lefty had been doing successfully for well 2 centuries or so in america,,,was bearing its fruits ( no ..well maybe some pun intended)
now here we are all these glorious years later and we get to see what we can or wont do about it
noticing (some?) on fox news use the term “unhoused” etc….
so lefty is not about to back-off b/c one of their own,,again,,murdered an innocent american
they are empowered
we should be embarrassed
You know why Charlie Kirk was murdered? Because when there was rioting in Kenosha, and Kyle Rittenhouse showed up with an AR-15, 20,000 Kenoshans didn’t show up with their own AR-15s to help him defend their own city. That’s why we are in our current situation.
did they really fire him b/c they thought he was wrong or just b/c they think their financial mess could be looked into by a maga admin?
yeah,,it does matter
Divisive = open to honest debate. Without use of invectives.
Divisive = constantly showed up their leadrs as the scatterbrained lightweights they were.
No one should ever rejoice in anyone’s illness or death. A doctor should treat to the best of his ability, absolutely anyone. That includes an enemy soldier, a murderer, etc. All a doctor should ever see is someone in need. I think that has always been the medical creed until now.
I hardly knew anything about Charlie Kirk, but his murder troubles me to no end. I have to fight back the rage because that’s a terrible emotion. The effect on his family, especially the very young children makes it very hard for me not to feel rage. The high holy days are coming up. A chance to reflect, and pray for forgiveness for my shortcomings. Try to be a better Jew, a better father, a better friend, and a better citizen.
No, I have to strongly disagree with that. That is just silly.
The point about doctors and hospitals treating everyone who comes in is that no one knows who is guilty of what. But once someone knows that someone is a murderer then there is absolutely no reason to treat them for anything. If a doctor sees someone murder another in the street – like the savage who killed Iryna Zarutska- and then sees the murderer get hit by a car he should leave the murderer to die in the street. If a doctor saw that guy murder her and the doctor had a gun he should have shot him right then and there.
Let’s get a little perspective.
Your’e the one who needs perspective. Doctors and nurses should not make moral or legal decisions with regard to patient care. Otherwise we get a slippery slope that leads to them taking active measures against their patients. This has already happened. From the Nursing Times:
“A nurse in Australia is due in court next month after stating she would refuse to treat Israeli patients if they came to her hospital, and that she would kill them, in an alleged antisemitic video.”
The commitment to treating all who are ill must remain absolute, allowing no wiggle room for one to inject personal ideology. Moreover for you to label my position “silly” shows your very limited perspective. Of course the innocent should get priority in an emergency situation when resources are limited.
That goes against everything you just wrote.
You know that I’m correct but just don’t want to admit it in so few words.
And your example about some monster who hates Jews is not even remotely comparable to the idea of treating an enemy soldier or a murderer.
Pretty sure her saying that she’d kill the patient may have something to do with her being in trouble.
While I’m commenting here in this particular conversation, I’ll mention that I’ve long been mystified why, when a prisoner serving a term “for the rest of his natural life,” is given any life-saving treatments. Treating the prisoner extends his life beyond the death that would have occurred from his ailment. Disease is completely natural. Why aren’t diseases allowed to contribute to the natural end of a lifer?
Great, but you said “no one.” Not “no one with a moral duty.”
Doctors, lawyers, judges… they have a moral duty to treat scumbags.
I don’t.
Random thoughts.
Now they want to have unity. Too late.
I guess according to Dowd, women who are raped brought it upon themselves.
The left made the mistake of thinking that the right would idly sit by and continue to be abused after they have tried to assassinate the president, members of Congress, and now conservative Commentators.
Charlie Kirk was the step too far.
So, no, we will no longer accept your apologies. We hate you, and you will know how much we hate you.
Unity?
It’s in the same box as your COVID Karen Amnesty.
Bend over a little more and reach up higher inside there.
That’s irrelevant. As I said in the original post on this, I don’t think Dowd’s remark was evil, I think it was stupid and ignorant, and that he deserved to be fired not for being evil but for being too stupid and ignorant to do his job. And even if he’s telling the truth here, that doesn’t change anything. He still doesn’t get what was wrong with what he said. It wasn’t that someone was dead; it was his delusional belief that Kirk supporters, i.e. supporters of a “diehard advocate of the 2nd amendment”, are prone to shooting randomly into the air like Arabs at a wedding. That shows his contempt for — and utter ignorance of — American gun culture, and that’s what he should have been fired for.
But not into the air. Only at a target with a proper backstop.
Dowd’s musing that “it might have been a supporter shooting off his gun in celebration” was as dumb as anything ever said on TV. And, while Dowd is a total moron, I would say that one cannot deny the evil nature of anyone who would propose something like that on TV, especially trying to claim that it would be from a conservative. It’s crazy and retarded but also CLEARLY motivated by an animus and attempt to smear conservatives while downplaying the assassination.
“his contempt for — and utter ignorance of — American gun culture, and that’s what he should have been fired for.”
Cripes, you’d empty out America’s newsrooms faster than Black Friday emptied the stock markets..
“But not into the air.”
Unless you’re trying to frighten an intruder away from your home. Then, by all means, step out onto your porch and fire your shotgun into the air.
“Buy a shotgun. Buy a shotgun.”
I was talking about firing Dowd.
And I would take issue with your comment, but I recognize the quote. Biden’s an idiot; but we already knew that.
He said what he said. It was not in a vacuum. Dowd had been increasingly unhinged and sleazy for a number of years. He belongs in The Lincoln Project. Now he is free to emulate Olbermann.
As for the “warning” to tone it down, it will only makes these fakers appear even more inauthentic that they already appear. The field is hopeless because it’s filled with incompetence and the deranged.
Katy Tur was just as bad as Dowd – nodding and agreeing all along – as well as the whole gang in the production room running everything and having Katy’s earpiece at their disposal. But MSNBC pretended it was just Dowd .. It was the whole crew of that show.
Tur only has a job because management believes she attracts men with the fantasy of her performing sexual favors of the oral variety.
What they don’t see is that she is so brain fnnn dead most men realize she wouldn’t be any good at so who cares what she looks like.
I recall her during the initial reporting of Oct 7th make comments to the effect that the attacks were justified due to the settlements on the West Bank being expanded.
I have no idea how so much stupid can fit in such a small head.
She’s a very pretty girl, no doubt (at least on TV she is) that this seems reasonable … except that there are thousands of equally pretty or better looking women who could take her job and do it better.
Maybe she was trying to test out her comedic chops during the broadcast?
I have to say it was pretty funny finding out her father is trns. It seemed … apt.
They’ve done such a job over the years helping to create the toxic stew with their lies and innuendo. You really can’t hate the lying misleadia enough.
“hateful thoughts lead to hateful words which ultimately lead to hateful actions”
That’s the problem, Dowd. You characterized Kirk’s opinions as hateful and you were then absolutely dumbfounded at the resulting outrage. Leftists actually believe EVERYONE believes the same things they do. They believe they are 90% of the population.
Why is Katy Turd still employed?
Level 11 irony: People who think it’s OK to kill someone for expressing an opinion whine when they lose their jobs for expressing their opinions.
The bosses want the spinoff of msnbc and the other stuff to the spinco company (now called Versant) to go smooth. End of year is the deadline. The reporters will not have an endless stream of funding in their future,
Versant will be looking to shed liabilities. Lots there at msnbc