Singer Pink has come under fire after unverified social media posts attributed to her allegedly mocked the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. Criticism surged following claims the posts included harsh comparisons and commentary about flag protocols and funeral ideas, though there is no definitive proof Pink made some of the more inflammatory remarks.
Fan pages and pages like Dnews shared posts saying that Pink criticized President Trump for lowering flags to half‑staff for Kirk while not doing the same for schoolchildren. Other reports alleged she reposted quotes telling others to question what Kirk was known for or what he said before mourning him. One widely circulated post suggested a “funeral idea” involving a closed casket, the sound of “Pop Goes the Weasel,” and expectant silence from attendees—content many interpreted as tasteless or insensitive. None of these claims have been officially confirmed by Pink or her representatives, although screenshots and social media content have circulated widely.
TikTok user RigoStaRR strongly criticized Pink, accusing her of “crossing the line” and calling for fans to cancel her music. RigoStaRR claimed the posts were tone‑deaf and blasphemous, especially given the recent controversy. He also echoed concerns about double standards over what kinds of deaths prompt national mourning and expressed anger that people seem more outraged by political murders than losses like school shootings.
Supporters of free speech argue that criticism, satire, or questioning is protected, especially when the public figure’s views themselves are controversial. Others maintain that mocking someone’s death—even a political figure—is insensitive and may contribute to divisive rhetoric.
Because the allegations about Pink’s statements remain unverified, this controversy reflects larger issues in the social media era: rapid spread of questionable claims, pressure for public figures to respond, and how online outrage can shape narratives before facts are confirmed.
