In a notable instance of misinformation retraction, celebrated author Stephen King has publicly apologized for and retracted a social media post containing false claims about conservative activist Charlie Kirk. The controversy unfolded following a heated exchange on X (formerly Twitter) and highlights the dangers of spreading unverified information, especially in the wake of a tragedy.
The Erroneous Post and Immediate Backlash
The incident began on Friday, September 12, 2025, just days after the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University on Wednesday, September 10, 2025. According to reports from The Independent, King responded to a post by Fox News host Jesse Watters, who had lauded the deceased Kirk as a “patriot.” King’s now-deleted reply asserted, “He advocated stoning gays to death. Just sayin’.” This statement triggered a swift and intense wave of criticism, particularly from Kirk’s supporters and prominent conservative figures.
Senator Ted Cruz, as reported by Newsweek, was among the first to publicly condemn King’s statement, branding him a “horrible, evil, twisted liar.” The severity of the reaction underscores the sensitivity surrounding Kirk’s death and the potential for misinformation to inflame already heightened emotions. The speed at which the backlash materialized demonstrates the power of social media to amplify both accurate information and falsehoods, demanding immediate accountability from public figures.
The Source of the Misinformation
The origin of King’s inaccurate statement appears to lie in past comments made by Charlie Kirk in 2024. During a discussion concerning YouTuber Ms. Rachel’s use of “love your neighbor” to defend Pride celebrations, Kirk referenced Leviticus 18, stating that “thou shall lay with another man, shall be stoned to death,” while adding “Just sayin’.” While Kirk cited the biblical passage, he did not explicitly advocate for the act of stoning, a crucial distinction that was overlooked by King in his initial post, as noted by Geo.tv.
King himself acknowledged his error, tweeting, “This is what I get for reading something on Twitter w/o fact-checking. Won’t happen again.” This admission highlights a critical issue in the digital age: the ease with which unverified information can be disseminated and accepted as truth. King’s experience serves as a cautionary tale for all social media users, particularly those with large followings, emphasizing the importance of due diligence before sharing potentially inflammatory content.
King’s Retraction and Apology
Following the widespread criticism, Stephen King issued a public apology and retracted his initial claim. According to Yahoo News Canada, King clarified his position, stating, “I apologize for saying Charlie Kirk advocated stoning gays. What he actually demonstrated was how some people cherry-pick Biblical passages.” He further reiterated his apology in multiple responses to critics, confirming he was “wrong” and had deleted the original post. This act of contrition, while welcomed by some, did little to quell the ongoing debate surrounding Kirk’s views and legacy.
The apology, while addressing the factual inaccuracy of his statement, did not fully resolve the underlying issue. King’s follow-up comments continued to critique the selective use of religious texts, ensuring that the discussion around Kirk’s views and legacy remained active. This nuanced approach suggests that while King acknowledged his error in attributing a specific position to Kirk, he maintained his criticism of the broader context surrounding Kirk’s statements.
Impact of the Misinformation
The incident involving Stephen King and Charlie Kirk serves as a stark reminder of the rapid spread of misinformation on social media, particularly in the wake of high-profile events. The consequences of such misinformation can be far-reaching, potentially damaging reputations, inciting anger, and further polarizing public discourse. As highlighted by Soap Central, the incident underscores the need for increased media literacy and critical thinking skills among social media users.
Furthermore, the incident raises questions about the responsibility of public figures to verify information before sharing it with their followers. While King’s apology was a step in the right direction, it does not negate the potential harm caused by his initial post. The incident serves as a valuable lesson for all social media users, emphasizing the importance of fact-checking and responsible online behavior.
The Broader Context: Selective Use of Religious Texts
While King apologized for the factual inaccuracy of his statement, his follow-up comments continued to address the broader issue of the selective use of religious texts. This suggests that King’s primary concern was not simply with Kirk’s views on homosexuality, but rather with the potential for religious texts to be misinterpreted or manipulated to justify discriminatory beliefs or actions.
This aspect of the controversy highlights the ongoing debate surrounding the interpretation of religious texts and their relevance to contemporary social issues. While some argue that religious texts should be interpreted literally and applied to modern society, others advocate for a more nuanced and contextual understanding. The incident involving King and Kirk underscores the complexities of this debate and the potential for differing interpretations to lead to conflict and misunderstanding.
Conclusion
The Stephen King and Charlie Kirk incident, a clear case of misinformation retraction, underscores the critical need for responsible social media usage, especially by public figures. The rapid spread of unverified information, compounded by selective interpretations of sensitive topics, can have significant consequences. King’s apology, while addressing the factual inaccuracy, also sparked a broader discussion about the responsible use of religious texts, highlighting the complexities of online discourse and the importance of critical thinking in the digital age.
