🔗 Share this article

“Incidents take place.” Just two words. That’s all it took for the US president to brush off what is probably the most infamous journalist killing of the last decade – and in so doing plumbed a new low in his contempt for journalists, for the media – and for the truth.

The Context

The US president’s dismissal of the murder of well-known reporter Jamal Khashoggi came during a media briefing with the Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman – a man whom the CIA concluded in a 2021 report had ordered the abduction and murder of the Washington Post columnist in that year. (Prince Mohammed has rejected accusations.)

The American spy agencies were not the sole entities to conclude the murder – which took place in the Saudi diplomatic building in Turkey and in which the 59-year-old journalist was sedated and cut apart – was approved at the top echelons. An investigation led by former UN expert, Agnès Callamard, reached similar conclusions.

International Response

For a short time, nations were in agreement in their condemnation of Saudi Arabia’s actions. The United States enacted sanctions and travel restrictions in 2021 over the murder, although it refrained of penalizing the crown prince himself. Since then, the nation has been slowly rehabilitating itself – and the crown prince’s visit to Washington seemed to be the final confirmation of that redemption.

White House Remarks

Opponents of the government 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 the president honor Prince Mohammed but he effectively rewrote the facts – and then blamed the deceased. Prince Mohammed, he claimed when asked, knew nothing about the killing – in clear opposition to what his nation’s spy agencies determined four years ago. Moreover, the president said: “Many individuals disliked that gentleman that you’re talking about, whether you like him or disapproved, things happen.”

Established Conduct

This represents a fresh and shameful low for a leader who has made little secret of his disdain for the truth – or for the press. Trump has smeared reporters (he called a news network, whose journalist asked the question about the journalist at the media event “false information”), berated them in public (he called one a “piggy” this week for asking about his connection with the convicted sex offender financier Jeffrey Epstein), sued news outlets for eye-watering sums of money in vexatious law suits, and called for news outlets he doesn’t like to lose their licenses.

He has forced veteran news services out of the White House press pool for refusing to use language of his choosing, and he has gutted financial support for essential public media at domestically and crucial free press abroad.

Broader Implications

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

It is unsurprising that that year was the deadliest year on file for journalists in the more than 30 years the press freedom organization has been tracking this data: a ongoing neglect to hold those accountable for reporter murders has created a culture of impunity in which those who murder reporters are literally able to get away with murder and so persist in these actions.

In no place is this more evident than in the Middle Eastern nation, which is responsible for the deaths of more than 200 media workers in the recent period.

Societal Impact

The impact on society is deep. Attacks on journalists are attacks on the truth. They are attacks on facts. They are violations of our rights to know and on our liberty to exist without fear and securely.

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