🔗 Share this article

“Incidents take place.” A mere phrase. That was enough for Donald Trump to effectively dismiss what is probably the most infamous murder of a reporter of the last decade – and in so doing plumbed a new low in his contempt for the press, for the media – and for the truth.

Background Details

The US president’s dismissal of the murder of well-known reporter Jamal Khashoggi came during a press conference with the Saudi leader, MBS – a man whom the US intelligence found in a 2021 report had ordered the abduction and murder of the journalist in that year. (The crown prince has rejected accusations.)

The American spy agencies were not the only ones to determine the murder – which occurred in the Saudi diplomatic building in Turkey and in which the 59-year-old Khashoggi was sedated and cut apart – was signed off at the top echelons. An investigation led by then UN special rapporteur, Agnès Callamard, reached similar conclusions.

International Response

For a short time, nations were unified in their condemnation of Saudi Arabia’s actions. The United States enacted sanctions and travel restrictions in 2021 over the killing, although it stopped short of sanctioning Prince Mohammed himself. Since then, the nation has been slowly rehabilitating itself – and the crown prince’s visit to the US capital seemed to be the ultimate sign of that redemption.

White House Remarks

Opponents of the government had strongly criticized the meeting. But what was on display at the White House was more alarming than could have been imagined. Not only did the president fete Prince Mohammed but he seemed to alter the facts – and then blamed the deceased. The crown prince, Trump claimed when asked, was unaware about the murder – in direct contradiction to what his country’s own intelligence services determined previously. Moreover, Trump said: “Many individuals disliked that gentleman that you’re talking about, whether you like him or didn’t like him, things happen.”

Pattern of Behavior

This represents a fresh and shameful low for a president who has made little secret of his disdain for the facts – or for the press. He has defamed reporters (he called ABC news, whose reporter asked the inquiry about the journalist at the media event “fake news”), berated them in public (he called one a “rude name” this week for asking about his connection with the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein), taken legal action against news outlets for eye-watering sums of money in vexatious law suits, and called for news outlets he doesn’t like to be shut down.

He has pressured established media out of the White House press pool for refusing to use terminology of his preference, and he has slashed funding for vital news services at home and crucial free press internationally.

Broader Implications

All of that has created an environment in which journalists are manifestly less safe in the US, but one in which their victimization – and indeed killing – becomes not just unimportant (“things happen”) but acceptable (“a lot of people didn’t like that person”).

It is unsurprising that 2024 was the deadliest year on file for journalists in the more than 30 years the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) has been documenting this data: a persistent failure to hold those accountable for reporter murders has created a culture of impunity in which those who murder reporters are actually able to escape punishment and so persist in these actions.

In no place is this more evident than in the Middle Eastern nation, which is responsible for the killing of over two hundred journalists in the recent period.

Societal Impact

The impact on society is deep. Attacks on journalists are assaults on facts. They are attacks on facts. They are attacks on our entitlement to information and on our liberty to exist without fear and securely.

On Thursday, CPJ meets for its yearly global journalism honors. My message there is the identical as my message for the president: such events may happen. But it is our responsibility to make sure they do not.