🔗 Share this article

“Things happen.” Just two words. That was enough for the US president to brush off what is arguably the most notorious journalist killing of the last decade – and in so doing sank to a fresh depth in his contempt for the press, for journalism – and for the truth.

The Context

The US president’s dismissal of the murder of prominent journalist the Washington Post columnist came during a press conference with the Saudi leader, Mohammed bin Salman – a man whom the CIA found in a 2021 report had orchestrated the abduction and murder of the journalist in that year. (The crown prince has rejected accusations.)

The US intelligence services were not the only ones to determine the murder – which occurred in the Saudi consulate in Turkey and in which the late journalist was drugged and cut apart – was approved at the highest levels. An inquiry led by then UN special rapporteur, Agnès Callamard, reached similar conclusions.

International Response

For a short time, nations were in agreement in their criticism of Saudi Arabia’s actions. The United States enacted penalties and visa bans in 2021 over the murder, although it stopped short of penalizing Prince Mohammed himself. Since then, the kingdom has been gradually restoring itself – and the leader’s trip to the US capital seemed to be the ultimate sign of that rehabilitation.

Presidential Comments

Opponents of the government had roundly condemned the meeting. But what was evident at the presidential residence was worse than could have been anticipated. Not only did the president honor the Saudi leader but he seemed to alter history – and then blamed the deceased. The crown prince, Trump claimed when asked, was unaware about the killing – in clear opposition to what his nation’s intelligence services concluded four years ago. Moreover, the president said: “A lot of people didn’t like that person that you’re talking about, whether you approve of him or didn’t like him, incidents occur.”

Pattern of Behavior

This represents a new and abject point for a president who has made little secret of his contempt for the facts – or for the press. He has defamed reporters (he called ABC news, whose reporter asked the inquiry about Khashoggi at the Saudi press conference “false information”), scolded them in public (he called one a “piggy” this week for asking about his relationship with the disgraced financier the convicted criminal), taken legal action against media organizations for eye-watering sums of money in frivolous cases, and called for media groups he doesn’t like to be shut down.

He has forced established media out of the White House press pool for refusing to use terminology of his choosing, and he has slashed funding for vital news services at home and vital independent media abroad.

Broader Implications

All of that has created an atmosphere in which journalists are clearly more vulnerable in the US, but one in which their targeting – and indeed murder – becomes not just insignificant (“incidents occur”) but tolerated (“many individuals didn’t like that person”).

It is unsurprising that that year was the most lethal year on file for journalists in the over three decades the press freedom organization has been tracking this information: a persistent failure to hold those responsible for journalist killings has established a environment without consequences in which those who murder reporters are literally able to get away with murder and so continue to do so.

Nowhere is this clearer than in the Middle Eastern nation, which is responsible for the killing of more than 200 media workers in the recent period.

Societal Impact

The impact on the public is profound. Targeting reporters are assaults on facts. They are attacks on facts. They are violations of our rights to know and on our freedom to live freely and safely.

On Thursday, CPJ meets for its yearly global journalism honors. The statement at the event is the same as my one for Trump: these things may occur. But it is our duty to make sure they cease.