🔗 Share this article

“Stuff occurs.” A mere phrase. That’s all it took for the US president to brush off what is probably the most notorious murder of a reporter of the past ten years – and in so doing sank to a fresh depth in his disregard toward the press, for the media – and for the truth.

Background Details

The American leader’s dismissal of the killing of well-known reporter the Washington Post columnist came during a media briefing with the Saudi leader, MBS – a man whom the US intelligence found in a recent assessment had orchestrated the abduction and murder of the Washington Post columnist in that year. (Prince Mohammed has rejected accusations.)

The US intelligence services were not the only ones to conclude the murder – which took place in the Saudi diplomatic building in Turkey and in which the late Khashoggi was drugged and cut apart – was approved at the highest levels. An inquiry led by former UN expert, Agnès Callamard, reached similar conclusions.

Global Reactions

For a short time, nations were in agreement in their condemnation of the kingdom’s conduct. The United States enacted sanctions and travel restrictions in 2021 over the murder, although it refrained of penalizing Prince Mohammed himself. Since then, the kingdom has been gradually restoring itself – and the crown prince’s visit to the US capital seemed to be the final confirmation of that rehabilitation.

White House Remarks

Opponents of the government had roundly condemned the meeting. But what was evident at the presidential residence was more alarming than could have been anticipated. Not only did Trump honor the Saudi leader but he seemed to alter the facts – and then pointed fingers at the deceased. The crown prince, he claimed when asked, was unaware about the murder – in direct contradiction to what his country’s own intelligence services determined four years ago. Moreover, Trump said: “Many individuals didn’t like that gentleman that you’re talking about, whether you approve of him or didn’t like him, things happen.”

Pattern of Behavior

This marks a new and abject point for a president who has made little secret of his contempt for the truth – or for the press. Trump has defamed journalists (he called a news network, whose reporter asked the question about the journalist at the media event “false information”), berated them in open settings (he called one a “piggy” this week for asking about his relationship with the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein), sued 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 White House press pool for refusing to use terminology of his preference, and he has slashed financial support for essential public media at home and vital independent media abroad.

Wider Consequences

All of that has created an atmosphere in which reporters are clearly more vulnerable in the United States, but one in which their victimization – and indeed killing – becomes not just unimportant (“incidents occur”) but tolerated (“many individuals disliked that person”).

It is no surprise that that year was the most lethal year on record for the press in the over three decades the press freedom organization has been tracking this information: a persistent failure to hold those responsible for reporter murders has established a environment without consequences in which journalists’ killers are actually able to get away with murder and so continue to do so.

In no place is this more evident than in Israel, which is responsible for the killing of over two hundred media workers in the past two years.

Effect on Society

The effect on the public is deep. Attacks on journalists are attacks on the truth. They are attacks on facts. They are violations of our entitlement to information and on our liberty to exist without fear and safely.

On Thursday, CPJ gathers 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 responsibility to make sure they do not.