Utah Gov. Spencer Cox calls social media companies ‘conflict entrepreneurs’ that share blame for Charlie Kirk’s death
Summary
Utah Governor Spencer Cox told NBC’s Meet the Press that social media platforms have played a “direct role” in recent assassinations and assassination attempts, pointing to the fatal shooting of conservative activist Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University as an example. He described algorithms as addictive and compared the effect of outrage-driven recommendation systems to fentanyl, accusing platforms of “hacking our brains” and labelling them “conflict entrepreneurs” that erode individual agency. Cox noted Utah’s 2024 laws aimed at protecting minors online and linked his remarks to broader state litigation against companies such as Meta and TikTok. He urged a return to community and neighbourliness as a remedy.
Key Points
- Cox said social media played a “direct role” in recent political violence, including Charlie Kirk’s death.
- He compared platform algorithms to fentanyl, saying they addict users to outrage.
- Cox called the companies “conflict entrepreneurs” that profit from division and reduce people’s agency.
- The comments come amid widespread legal action: 33 states sued Meta in 2023 over harms to young people, and multiple attorneys general have sued TikTok; Utah passed laws in 2024 to protect minors on social platforms.
- Cox urged Americans to rebuild community ties; representatives for Cox, Meta, TikTok and X did not respond to Business Insider’s request for comment.
Why should I read this?
Short and blunt: a sitting governor is publicly blaming platform design for deadly outcomes and using stark language that could tilt policy. If you follow tech regulation, political violence or the Charlie Kirk story, this is the kind of statement that matters — we’ve done the reading so you don’t have to.
Author take
Punchy: Cox’s rhetoric — “conflict entrepreneurs” and the fentanyl comparison — escalates the debate beyond everyday criticism of social platforms. It strengthens the signal for regulators and prosecutors already pressing Big Tech; worth paying attention to if you care about future rules and lawsuits.
Context and relevance
This sits at the crossroads of platform accountability, youth-protection laws and political-violence concerns. It ties into ongoing trends of state litigation against Meta and TikTok and growing calls for limits on algorithmic amplification of outrage and polarisation. Expect these remarks to feed policy discussions and legal strategies aimed at curbing harmful design choices.