🔗 Share this article

“Stuff occurs.” A mere phrase. That was enough for the US president to brush off what is probably the most notorious murder of a reporter of the last decade – and in so doing sank to a fresh depth in his contempt for journalists, for the media – and for the facts.

The Context

The American leader’s dismissal of the killing of prominent journalist the Washington Post columnist came during a media briefing with the Saudi leader, MBS – a man whom the US intelligence found in a 2021 report had ordered the abduction and murder of the journalist in that year. (The crown prince has denied involvement.)

The US intelligence services were not the sole entities to determine the homicide – which took place in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul and in which the late Khashoggi was sedated and cut apart – was approved at the highest levels. An investigation led by former UN expert, Agnès Callamard, reached similar conclusions.

Global Reactions

For a brief period, nations were unified in their criticism of the kingdom’s conduct. The US enacted sanctions and visa bans in 2021 over the killing, although it stopped short of penalizing the crown prince himself. Since then, the nation has been slowly rehabilitating itself – and the leader’s trip to the US capital seemed to be the ultimate sign of that redemption.

Presidential Comments

Critics of the regime had roundly condemned the visit. But what was on display at the White House was more alarming than could have been anticipated. Not only did Trump fete Prince Mohammed but he seemed to alter history – and then pointed fingers at the deceased. Prince Mohammed, he asserted when asked, was unaware about the killing – in clear opposition to what his nation’s intelligence services determined four years ago. Moreover, the president said: “Many individuals disliked that person that you’re talking about, whether you approve of him or didn’t like him, incidents occur.”

Established Conduct

This marks a new and abject point for a president who has made no attempt to hide of his disdain for the truth – or for the media. He has smeared reporters (he called ABC news, whose reporter asked the question about the journalist at the media event “false information”), scolded them in public (he called one a “piggy” this week for asking about his connection with the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein), taken legal action against news outlets for large amounts of money in frivolous cases, and called for news outlets he doesn’t like to be shut down.

He has pressured veteran news services out of the official briefing group for refusing to use language of his preference, and he has slashed financial support for vital news services at domestically and crucial free press abroad.

Broader Implications

All of that has created an environment in which reporters are manifestly less safe in the United States, but one in which their targeting – and indeed murder – becomes not just insignificant (“incidents occur”) but tolerated (“many individuals didn’t like that gentleman”).

It is no surprise that that year was the most lethal year on file for journalists in the more than 30 years the press freedom organization has been tracking this data: a ongoing neglect to bring to justice those responsible for reporter murders has established a culture of impunity in which journalists’ killers are literally able to get away with murder and so persist in these actions.

Nowhere is this clearer than in Israel, which is responsible for the killing of over two hundred media workers in the recent period.

Effect on Society

The impact on society is profound. Attacks on journalists are attacks on the truth. They are attacks on facts. They are attacks on our rights to know and on our freedom to live freely and safely.

This week, CPJ gathers for its yearly International Press Freedom awards. The statement there is the identical as my one for the president: these things may happen. But it is our responsibility to make sure they do not.