A recent survey shows companies are cracking down on political speech as workplace tensions rise following the Charlie Kirk assassination, with one in four businesses reporting increased conflicts tied to employee social media activity.
One in four companies disciplined employees for political posts in the past month, with 60 per cent of those cases involving content about Charlie Kirk, according to a survey of 1,249 U.S. business leaders conducted in September 2025 by ResumeTemplates.com.
The most common disciplinary actions were suspension (39 per cent), reprimand (30 per cent) and termination (26 per cent), according to the survey.
Workplace conflicts spike after Kirk assassination
Among companies that reported increased conflicts tied to employee political posts in the past six months, 72 per cent said the problem worsened after the Charlie Kirk assassination. Seventeen per cent reported a significant increase in conflicts, while 55 per cent reported some increase.
Nearly half of companies (47 per cent) now view employee posts about divisive political topics as either a major liability (22 per cent) or moderate liability (25 per cent), according to the survey.
“Political discussions can create tension or even a hostile environment at work, so employees are better off avoiding them,” said Julia Toothacre, chief career strategist at ResumeTemplates.com. “Most companies don’t want to be linked to extreme views, and anything that risks damaging their reputation will likely be addressed.”
One in three companies tighten social media policies
Nearly one-third of companies (32 per cent) expanded their social media policies to make them more restrictive in the past six months, while 66 per cent left policies unchanged and two per cent loosened restrictions.
Among companies that toughened restrictions, 30 per cent made changes in the past month, 50 per cent made changes two to three months ago, and about 20 per cent adjusted policies four to six months ago.
Most companies apply social media policies equally to all employees (44 per cent), but 39 per cent impose stricter guidelines on managers, 28 per cent on customer-facing employees, and 21 per cent on senior leadership.
Brand reputation drives policy changes
Protecting brand reputation is the leading reason companies expanded restrictions, cited by 68 per cent of businesses. Other factors include preventing internal conflict (61 per cent), avoiding customer backlash (56 per cent), and reducing legal liability (56 per cent).
More than one in three companies (36 per cent) fear government retaliation, according to the survey.
“Stricter social media rules, which some may view as invasive or controlling, can backfire on recruiting and retention,” Toothacre said. “Another risk is workplace mistrust. When employees feel watched or fear being reported by co-workers, it erodes culture and makes collaboration harder.”
Companies expect rising liability concerns
Looking ahead to 2026, 49 per cent of companies expect employee political speech on social media to become a bigger liability.
Two-thirds of companies (66 per cent) cite internal conflict among employees as the most significant risk, followed by brand reputation concerns (60 per cent), customer backlash (59 per cent), legal issues (45 per cent) and government retaliation (29 per cent). Only four per cent said there are no risks.
Views on limiting political speech are mixed. Twenty-four per cent of companies say political speech should definitely be limited on social media, while 40 per cent say it probably should. Twenty-two per cent say it probably should not, and 14 per cent say it definitely should not.
The survey was conducted online by Pollfish in September 2025 with a margin of error of approximately plus or minus three percentage points at the 95 per cent confidence level.
