The subsequent removal of one pundit does not make things right.

I n 1963, a young and unscrupulous Texas journalist provided the nation with an early example of the deeply unethical reporting for which he’d later become infamous and, eventually, unemployed.

It was November in Dallas. The situation: President John F. Kennedy had just been declared dead after being shot in the head.

The local journalist was Dan Rather.

Eager to make his mark during a fast-moving, breaking news event, Rather went on CBS’s national broadcast with a local minister’s claim that students at Dallas’s University Park Elementary School had cheered when they heard of the president’s death.

The story, of course, was bunkum. Worse, according to Eddie Barker, the news director at the time for CBS’s radio and TV affiliates in Dallas, Dan Rather knew the story was probably bunkum.

Yet, the young journalist reported it anyway. The president was just assassinated. Things are moving quickly. No time to be careful!

On Wednesday, MSNBC’s Katy Tur nearly surpassed the 1963 incident in terms of sheer recklessness, as she led the network’s coverage of the assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. The coverage was so bad, in fact, and Tur’s attempt to helm the desk so incompetent, that one person has already been fired, and the chiefs of MSNBC, NBC News, and Comcast have weighed in, warning staff on tone in a company-wide memo.

The Turning Point USA founder and father of two was declared dead within hours of being shot in the neck by a rifleman during a speaking engagement in Utah.

As details of the attack trickled in, Tur, who was ill-prepared throughout, invited her guests to freely theorize about the attack and its implications.

“Charlie Kirk was a divisive figure, polarizing, lightning rod — whatever term you want to use. Why?” the anchor asked longtime network contributor Matthew Dowd.

He responded: “We don’t know if [the gunshot] was a supporter shooting their gun off in celebration. We have no idea. We don’t know any of the full details of this.”

A celebratory round? This is Utah, not the Hindu Kush.

It only got worse, with Dowd suggesting that Kirk somehow brought on his own shooting by expressing an opinion. “He’s been one of the most divisive, especially divisive younger figures in this — who’s constantly sort of pushing this sort of hate speech or sort of aimed at certain groups.”

He added, “And I always go back to, hateful thoughts lead to hateful words, which then lead to hateful actions. And I think that is the environment we are in that . . . you can’t stop with these sort of awful thoughts you have and then saying these awful words and then not expect awful actions to take place.”

That Dowd, who has been selling himself as a political insider despite not having done political work since 2006, should think it insightful to suggest that Kirk’s murder was karmic justice for “awful words” is shameful enough. That Tur sat there, nodding along as if she were not in control of her desk, is inexplicable.

But Dowd’s comments were only one part of the problem with the network’s coverage.

At another point, Tur speculated before Kirk’s death had been announced that Utah’s “permissive” gun laws might have played a role in his assassination, suggesting that Wednesday’s shooting could stymie state efforts to pass new, more restrictive laws.

“Individuals 21 or older can legally own a gun and carry it openly or concealed in public without a permit,” she noted. “Again, no permit is required or needed to buy or possess a firearm. There’s no waiting period, no state mandate, state-mandated time period for firearm purchases. Utah does not require the registration of firearms.”

Tur further worried that those on the right, including President Trump, would, in some way, react to (you know, pounce on or seize upon) images of a 31-year-old conservative commentator having his throat pierced by a sniper’s bullet.

“After one of the DOGE employees was allegedly attacked in Washington, D.C., that’s what Donald Trump used as justification to send federal troops into Washington, D.C., to get things under control — the carjacking situation, he used that,” she said.

“Alleged”? There’s photo evidence of the assault of the DOGE worker.

Tur added ominously, “And I know it’s hard to predict the future, but you can imagine the administration using this as a justification for something.”

Then, she asked of another guest, reporter Allan Smith, “How worried do you get about somebody taking up the cause of Charlie Kirk?”

Taking up “the cause”? Does she mean engaging in peaceful and open debate? Is that something to worry about? I suppose one might argue this is a fair question, considering the significant number of people clearly enraged by exactly this activity.

Simply put, this was some of the worst breaking news coverage I’ve seen, and that’s including the stiff competition from Brian Williams’s decades of airtime-consuming bloviating. Tur is a lousy journalist, and on a day of chaos that called for utmost professionalism and sensitivity, she proved to be out of her depth. (Does someone need to send 30 Rock a care package of Vaudeville hooks?)

Don’t take my word for it. Just listen to the network brass.

MSNBC President Rebecca Kutler issued a statement Wednesday criticizing and apologizing for Dowd’s remarks. The statement was posted to MSNBC’s official public relations Twitter account, which has only 24,100 followers, rather than the network’s main account with its 5 million-plus followers. MSNBC later formally cut ties with Dowd.

On Friday, the apologies went even higher up the corporate chain.

“You may have seen that MSNBC recently ended its association with a contributor who made an unacceptable and insensitive comment about this horrific event,” Comcast CEO Brian Roberts, President Mike Cavanagh, and Versant CEO Mark Lazarus said in a memo to staff. “That coverage was at odds with fostering civil dialogue and being willing to listen to the points of view of those who have differing opinions. We should be able to disagree, robustly and passionately, but, ultimately, with respect. We need to do better.”

They added, “Regardless of whether you agreed with his political views, his words and actions underscore the urgency to maintain a respectful exchange of ideas – a principle we must champion. . . . As employees, we ask you to embody our values in your work and communities. We should engage with respect, listen, and treat people with kindness.”

You know you’ve screwed up when your handling of the desk results in a firing and a company-wide memo from three separate executives.

Katy Tur is not cut out for breaking news. Clearly. Whether the corporate media conglomerate that employs her can do it remains to be seen.