🔗 Share this article

“Incidents take place.” Just two words. That’s all it took for the US president to effectively dismiss what is arguably the most notorious journalist killing of the past ten years – and in so doing sank to a fresh depth in his disregard toward journalists, for journalism – and for the facts.

Background Details

The American leader’s dismissal of the murder of well-known reporter the Washington Post columnist came during a media briefing with the Saudi crown prince, MBS – a man whom the CIA found in a 2021 report had ordered the kidnap and killing of the Washington Post columnist in that year. (Prince Mohammed has denied involvement.)

The American spy agencies were not the only ones to conclude the homicide – which occurred in the Saudi consulate in Turkey and in which the late journalist was drugged and dismembered – was approved at the top echelons. An investigation led by former UN expert, the UN investigator, reached similar conclusions.

International Response

For a brief period, nations were in agreement in their condemnation of the kingdom’s conduct. The US imposed penalties and travel restrictions in that year over the killing, although it stopped short of sanctioning Prince Mohammed himself. Since then, the nation has been gradually restoring itself – and the crown prince’s visit to Washington seemed to be the ultimate sign of that redemption.

Presidential Comments

Opponents of the government had strongly criticized the visit. But what was evident at the White House was more alarming than could have been imagined. Not only did Trump honor the Saudi leader but he seemed to alter history – and then blamed the deceased. Prince Mohammed, Trump asserted when asked, knew nothing about the killing – in direct contradiction to what his country’s own intelligence services determined previously. Moreover, the president said: “Many individuals disliked that person that you’re talking about, whether you approve of him or disapproved, things happen.”

Established Conduct

This represents a new and abject point for a leader who has made little secret of his disdain for the truth – or for the press. He has defamed journalists (he called ABC news, whose journalist asked the inquiry about Khashoggi at the media event “false information”), berated them in open settings (he called one a “rude name” this week for asking about his relationship with the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein), taken legal action against news outlets for eye-watering sums of money in frivolous cases, and called for news outlets he doesn’t like to be shut down.

He has pressured established media out of the official briefing group for declining to use terminology of his choosing, and he has slashed financial support for vital news services at domestically and vital independent media internationally.

Wider Consequences

All of that has created an environment in which reporters are clearly more vulnerable in the US, but one in which their victimization – and indeed killing – becomes not just unimportant (“things happen”) but acceptable (“a lot of people disliked that person”).

It is unsurprising that that year was the most lethal year on file for the press in the more than 30 years the press freedom organization has been tracking this data: a ongoing neglect to bring to justice those accountable for reporter murders has established a culture of impunity in which those who murder reporters are actually able to escape punishment and so continue to do so.

In no place is this clearer than in Israel, which is responsible for the killing of over two hundred journalists in the recent period.

Effect on Society

The impact on the public is deep. Targeting reporters are attacks on the truth. They are undermining of reality. They are violations of our entitlement to information and on our freedom to exist without fear and safely.

This week, CPJ meets for its yearly International Press Freedom awards. My message there is the identical as my one for Trump: these things may happen. But it is our duty to make sure they cease.