🔗 Share this article

“Stuff occurs.” Just two words. That’s all it took for the US president to brush off what is arguably the most infamous murder of a reporter of the past ten years – and in so doing sank to a fresh depth in his contempt for journalists, for the media – and for the truth.

The Context

The American leader’s dismissal of the killing of prominent journalist Jamal Khashoggi came during a press conference with the Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman – a man whom the CIA concluded in a recent assessment had ordered the abduction and murder of the Washington Post columnist in 2018. (Prince Mohammed has denied involvement.)

The US intelligence services were not the only ones to conclude the murder – which took place in the Saudi diplomatic building in Istanbul and in which the 59-year-old journalist was drugged and dismembered – was approved at the highest levels. An inquiry led by then UN special rapporteur, Agnès Callamard, reached comparable findings.

Global Reactions

For a short time, nations were unified in their condemnation of the kingdom’s conduct. The United States enacted sanctions and visa bans in that year over the killing, although it stopped short of sanctioning the crown prince himself. Since then, the nation has been gradually restoring itself – and the leader’s trip to the US capital seemed to be the ultimate sign of that redemption.

White House Remarks

Critics of the government had strongly criticized the visit. But what was evident at the White House was worse than could have been anticipated. Not only did Trump fete the Saudi leader but he effectively rewrote the facts – and then pointed fingers at the deceased. The crown prince, he claimed when asked, was unaware about the killing – in clear opposition to what his nation’s intelligence services determined four years ago. Moreover, Trump said: “Many individuals disliked that person that you’re talking about, whether you like him or didn’t like him, incidents occur.”

Pattern of Behavior

This marks a fresh and shameful point for a leader who has made little secret of his disdain for the facts – or for the press. He has smeared reporters (he called a news network, whose journalist asked the question about Khashoggi at the media event “fake news”), berated them in public (he called one a “rude name” this week for asking about his relationship with the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein), sued media organizations for eye-watering sums of money in vexatious law suits, and called for media groups he doesn’t like to lose their licenses.

He has forced veteran news services out of the official briefing group for declining to use language of his preference, and he has gutted financial support for essential public media at domestically and crucial free press internationally.

Broader Implications

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

It is no surprise that that year was the deadliest year on file for journalists in the more than 30 years the press freedom organization has been documenting this information: a persistent failure to hold those responsible for reporter murders has created a culture of impunity in which journalists’ killers are literally able to get away with murder and so continue to do so.

In no place is this more evident than in the Middle Eastern nation, which is accountable for the killing of over two hundred media workers in the past two years.

Societal Impact

The impact on society is profound. Targeting reporters are assaults on facts. They are undermining of reality. They are violations of our entitlement to information and on our liberty to live freely and securely.

This week, CPJ meets for its yearly global journalism honors. My message there is the identical as my message for the president: these things may occur. But it is our responsibility to make sure they cease.