DC Comics has officially canceled its newest Red Hood series. This comes after writer Gretchen Felker-Martin made controversial remarks about Charlie Kirk, following his assassination. The posts included statements like “Hope the bullet’s okay after touching Charlie Kirk” and calling him a “Nazi bitch.”
Did the severity of her remarks leave them no choice?
I want to make it clear that while I don’t agree with Charlie Kirk or support his beliefs, he didn’t deserve to die because of them. I agree that Gretchen’s anger towards Charlie Kirk is justified since she’s a trans woman and Kirk has made anti-trans remarks in the past. I don’t agree with how she phrased her posts because there were better ways to express how she felt.
Felker-Martin has expressed no regret over the statements. The series had debuted its first issue on the same day Kirk was shot. It was an ongoing, mature-readers title featuring Jason Todd (Red Hood) and Huntress, set in the city of New Angelique.
DC says the remarks were inconsistent with “standards of conduct,” especially comments seen as inciting hostility or violence. The company emphasized that it respects creators’ viewpoints, but comments they perceive as glorifying or inciting violence cross a line.
Could DC revive Red Hood?
They can but it doesn’t seem likely. I don’t understand why DC chose to cancel the series outright instead of just putting it on a hiatus. It may have been Gretchen’s story but it can be told without her. Pull the series temporarily, wait until the dust settles and Charlie Kirk isn’t at the top of everyone’s minds.
Then bring the series back sometime next year with a new writer. They could pick up where issue one left off and finish any plot points Gretchen already had. Or they could start over with something new. Maybe do a deep dive into why Jason Todd went back to his violent, killing ways. It sucks because there are illustrators, inkers, letterers, and other staff who are now out of a job.
Freedom of expression vs. corporate responsibility
When does a company’s response to a creator’s behavior become a matter of principle instead of just damage control?
On one hand, creators are individuals with rights to express their opinions. On the other hand, publishers have reputations, stakeholders, and audiences to consider. Comments that appear to endorse or make light of political violence force companies to take action, especially when there’s public outcry.
The fact that Red Hood (2025) was canceled shows that DC feels the damage has been done. They seem to be convinced that this controversy will follow this series no matter what they do. So they decided to wash their hands of it and move on to something else.
What this cancellation tells us
A creator’s personal opinions are interconnected with their professional life. There’s no getting around that. Freedom of speech doesn’t mean freedom of consequences. This applies to everyone regardless of which side you’re on.
Companies will draw the line when someone makes remarks involving violence, threats, or endorsements of harm. When controversy does hit, it’s not always contained to just one person. Fellow employees, family and friends can suffer as well. This is just another reminder on why you should be mindful of what you say online.
