Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
What specific comments triggered Ben Shapiro and Candace Owens' public falling-out?
Executive summary
Ben Shapiro’s public break with Candace Owens erupted after he publicly condemned several of Owens’s remarks about the Israel–Gaza war as “disgraceful” and urged her to “quit” The Daily Wire if she felt taking money from the outlet conflicted with her conscience [1] [2]. The immediate flashpoint included Shapiro calling her commentary “absolutely disgraceful,” and Owens responding that he was “utterly out of line” for questioning her use of scripture and accusing him of ad hominem attacks [1] [3] [4].
1. How the spat began: disagreement over Israel and Gaza
The feud traces to differing public commentary during the Israel–Hamas conflict: Owens questioned U.S. support for Israel and made statements emphasizing there is “no justification for a genocide,” which colleagues and critics read as a critique of Israeli policy; Shapiro publicly rebuked her commentary as “disgraceful” and “riddled with errors,” saying her “faux sophistication” was “ridiculous” [5] [1]. Shapiro’s remarks were captured in a viral clip from a private event and then amplified on social media [3].
2. The key phrases that escalated things
Shapiro used direct, inflammatory language—he called Owens’s statements “absolutely disgraceful” and said she should “by all means quit” if her conscience conflicted with being paid by The Daily Wire—comments that Owens and supporters viewed as public humiliation and a demand she leave the platform [1] [2]. Owens fired back that Shapiro was “utterly out of line” for suggesting she couldn’t quote scripture and accused him of emotional, ad hominem attacks [3] [4].
3. Scripture, professionalism and personal barbs
A notable element of the public clash was Owens’s use of biblical verses—she tweeted “You cannot serve both God and money”—and her defenders argued Shapiro’s critique interfered with her invoking scripture; Shapiro rebutted that the Bible “is not about you,” prompting Owens’s rebuke that he had crossed a line by questioning her faith-based rhetoric [3]. Reporting shows both sides framed the dispute as about professional standards and public messaging, with each alleging the other acted improperly [1] [4].
4. Broader fault lines: antisemitism, policy and the conservative movement
Coverage situates this fight within a wider conservative split over Israel and accusations of antisemitism. Shapiro, who is Jewish, and others described some of Owens’s comments as crossing into troubling territory; reporting notes that her critiques of U.S. support for Israel and certain language about “political Jews” or criticisms of Israeli leadership have drawn sharp rebukes from Shapiro and others [6] [7]. Analysts and commentators framed the Shapiro–Owens rupture as symptomatic of fractures on the right over foreign policy and acceptable rhetoric [7].
5. Allies, reactions and why it mattered publicly
Other conservative figures weighed in: Charlie Kirk and pundits like Lauren Chen defended Owens’s right to question and quote scripture, while critics such as Dave Rubin and others faulted Owens for being insufficiently clear about Hamas atrocities—showing the dispute quickly became a public debate about boundaries within conservative media [8]. The viral nature of the video clips and social posts turned an internal workplace disagreement into a broader public spectacle [3] [8].
6. Subsequent flare-ups and related accusations
After the initial clash, further allegations and counterclaims intensified tensions, including highly charged accusations related to commentary on tragic events involving other conservative figures; reporting shows the fight did not stay confined to the original Israel-related comments but expanded as each side accused the other of lies and extreme statements [9] [10] [11]. Some of these later claims—such as whether Owens accused a named individual of murder—were hotly denied by Owens and remain contested in reporting [10] [11].
7. Limitations and what the available sources do not say
Available sources do not provide a single transcript of every exchange between Shapiro and Owens, nor do they present an adjudicated record proving all contextual claims attributed to either side [1] [3]. Sources summarize the viral clips, tweets, and interviews but also show disagreement among commentators about motive and proportionality; some stories emphasize Shapiro’s concern over rhetoric and accuracy, others stress Owens’s free-speech and anti-war positioning [5] [8].
8. Bottom line
The immediate trigger was Shapiro’s on-stage denunciation—calling Owens’s Israel-related commentary “absolutely disgraceful” and telling her she could “quit” if conflicted about payment—followed by Owens’s forceful rebuttals over his characterization and his questioning of her use of scripture. Journalists and commentators interpret that exchange as both a personal falling-out and a signal of deeper ideological fault lines within conservative media [1] [3] [8].