The release of Kanye West's new documentary has ignited fury among the family of Charlie Kirk, who was assassinated earlier this month.
Relatives say the film's inclusion of previously unseen footage of the conservative activist is 'disrespectful and cruel', accusing producers of exploiting his image just days after his killing.
Inside the Documentary
The two-hour documentary, titled 'In Whose Name?', was directed by Nick Ballesteros and features archival footage from 2018. It shows West in conversation with Kirk and commentator Candace Owens, debating politics, culture, and identity.
The film features previously unseen footage of Kanye West, conservative activist Charlie Kirk and commentator Candace Owens in conversation. The material captures the trio discussing politics, culture and identity.
Kirk, then co-founder of Turning Point USA, appears mostly silent while West and Owens lead the debate, but his presence has renewed focus following his recent death.
The documentary, which runs over two hours, presents West's personal reflections alongside archival clips. RadarOnline reports that West described the finished project as 'deep,' likening it to 'being dead and looking back on my life.' The inclusion of Kirk has become one of its most controversial elements, coming just days after his killing.
Was not expecting Charlie Kirk to be in Kanye’s new movie “In Whose Name” lol pic.twitter.com/9QuiYnKCBD
— ICY ❄️ (@dripstaricy) September 19, 2025
A Death That Shook Conservatives
Charlie Kirk, 31, was shot and killed on 10 September 2025 while speaking at Utah Valley University. The attack stunned supporters and critics alike, cutting short the career of a figure known for co-founding Turning Point USA and for his outspoken role in conservative politics. His sudden death has intensified emotions around how his image and legacy are handled in public forums.
Kirk is survived by his wife, Erika Kirk, and their young family. While they have not issued formal public statements, friends close to the family told RadarOnline that his loved ones were angered by the way the documentary used his likeness.
Family Outrage Over Timing
Those friends relayed that Kirk's relatives consider the film's release 'disrespectful and cruel,' accusing the production team of 'shameless exploitation' of his image so soon after his death. They said the timing, coming within days of the shooting, compounded the grief of those closest to him.
The documentary's makers have not publicly responded to the criticism. Industry observers note that rights to archival footage are often secured well in advance; however, ethical questions become sharper when a subject dies unexpectedly and the release follows immediately afterwards.
Why the Dispute Matters
The controversy highlights tensions at the intersection of celebrity, politics and media ethics. For supporters, Kirk's appearance is a historical document, reflecting a moment in political culture already in the public domain. For his family, however, the context has changed dramatically, and what might once have seemed routine now feels exploitative.
Questions remain over whether Kirk's estate was consulted or gave permission, and whether the filmmakers should have delayed the release out of sensitivity. Such disputes are likely to recur as documentaries increasingly rely on archival content, sometimes involving figures who die suddenly.
What Comes Next
Attention will now turn to how audiences respond and whether Kirk's family pursue legal or public action. Analysts say such disputes will likely become more common as filmmakers increasingly rely on archival footage featuring public figures.
Whatever the outcome, the uproar over In Whose Name? reflects the fragile balance between artistic freedom and respect for grieving families—a tension that will only grow as media production collides with personal tragedy.
