READ: The Washington Post’s Termination Letter to Columnist Karen Attiah Revealed
(Screengrab via YouTube)
Details of The Washington Post’s decision to fire longtime columnist Karen Attiah are coming into focus after the release of an HR letter late Monday that accused her of “gross misconduct” and unspecified “performance concerns,” declaring the paper could “not tolerate the risk” she posed.
Attiah revealed Monday via SubStack that she had been dismissed by the newspaper for social media posts about the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, but argued the posts in question were measured and focused not on Kirk but on growing tolerance for political violence.
“Charges without evidence, which I reject completely as false,” she wrote.
The Post’s letter, dated September 11 and signed by Human Resources chief Wayne Connell, which was obtained and published by Status’ Oliver Darcy, offers a sharper picture of management’s case.
It alleges that Attiah’s Bluesky posts in the aftermath of Kirk’s killing “violate The Post’s social media policies, harm the integrity of our organization, and potentially endanger the physical safety of our staff.”
Among the cited posts were comments including: “Refusing to tear my clothes and smear ashes on my face in performative mourning for a white man that espoused violence is… not the same as violence” and “Part of what keeps America so violent is the insistence that people perform care, empty goodness and absolution for white men who espouse hatred and violence.”
The letter also pointedly referenced “documented performance concerns,” suggesting that longstanding internal issues compounded the fallout.
“Given these concerns, and in light of your recent unacceptable Bluesky posts, we cannot tolerate the risk your performance poses to The Post,” the letter reads.
Attiah, who joined the paper in 2014 and rose to become its founding Global Opinions editor, rejected the rationale.
“Nothing I said was new or false or disparaging – it is descriptive, and supported by data,” she wrote, adding that her only direct reference to Kirk had been to quoting “his own words,” however some have noted that tweet was not Kirk’s “own words” but a misquote made by the activist in a tirade about affirmative action naming specific individuals.
Her ouster follows a spate of firings across media outlets over commentary on Kirk’s killing. MSNBC dropped analyst Matthew Dowd after he described the Turning Point USA founder as “divisive” and a promoter of “hate speech.”
The Washington Post has not publicly commented. Her firing has been publicly protested by the Washington Post Guild.
Read the termination letter in full below:
September 11, 2025
Karen,
I am writing to inform you that The Post is terminating your employment effective immediately for gross misconduct. Your public comments on social media regarding the death of Charlie Kirk violate The Post’s social media policies, harm the integrity of our organization, and potentially endanger the physical safety of our staff.
Among other requirements, the Company-wide social media policy mandates that all employee social media postings be respectful and prohibits postings that disparage people based on their race, gender or other protected characteristics. The policy also reminds employees that everything they post is a reflection on the Company and should not affect the integrity of The Post’s journalism. Your postings on Bluesky (which clearly identifies you as a Post Columnist) about white men in response to the killing of Charlie Kirk do not comply with our policy. For example, you posted: “Refusing to tear my clothes and smear ashes on my face in performative mourning for a white man that espoused violence is…. not the same as violence” and “Part of what keeps America so violent is the insistence that people perform care, empty goodness and absolution for white men who espouse hatred and violence.”
In addition, just last year, Opinions leadership asked everyone in the Opinions Department to review the newsroom social media guidelines, attached those guidelines to an email to the Department for review, and reiterated in that email the “bedrock principle that our use of social media must never harm the journalistic integrity or reputation of The Post“. The poor judgment exhibited by your public comments regarding Charlie Kirk arise against the backdrop of documented performance concerns, which have been raised with you. Given these concerns, and in light of your recent unacceptable Bluesky posts, we cannot tolerate the risk your performance poses to The Post.
Please remove any reference to your affiliation with The Washington Post on any public- facing profiles immediately.
You will receive a separate letter from The Post’s Benefits Department concerning your eligibility for any other Post benefits upon termination.
In the event that you have left any personal items on the premises, we will make arrangements to return them to you and for you to return any Post equipment you have in your possession.
Sincerely,
Wayne Connell
Chief HR Officer
The Washington Post
