🔗 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 contempt for the press, for the media – and for the truth.

Background Details

The American leader’s dismissal of the murder of prominent journalist Jamal Khashoggi came during a press conference with the Saudi leader, MBS – a man whom the US intelligence concluded in a 2021 report had ordered the abduction and murder of the Washington Post columnist in 2018. (Prince Mohammed has rejected accusations.)

The American spy agencies were not the only ones to conclude the murder – which took place in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul and in which the 59-year-old Khashoggi was drugged and dismembered – was signed off at the top echelons. An inquiry led by then UN special rapporteur, Agnès Callamard, reached comparable findings.

International Response

For a short time, nations were in agreement in their condemnation of Saudi Arabia’s actions. The US enacted sanctions and travel restrictions in that year over the murder, although it stopped short of penalizing the crown prince himself. Since then, the nation has been gradually restoring itself – and the leader’s trip to Washington seemed to be the ultimate sign of that rehabilitation.

Presidential Comments

Opponents of the government had roundly condemned the meeting. But what was on display at the presidential residence was more alarming than could have been anticipated. Not only did Trump fete Prince Mohammed but he effectively rewrote the facts – and then pointed fingers at the deceased. The crown prince, he asserted when asked, knew nothing about the killing – in clear opposition to what his nation’s spy agencies concluded previously. Moreover, Trump said: “A lot of people didn’t like that person that you’re talking about, whether you like him or disapproved, incidents occur.”

Established Conduct

This marks a new and abject point for a president who has made little secret of his disdain for the facts – or for the media. Trump has smeared reporters (he called ABC news, whose journalist asked the question 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 relationship with the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein), sued news outlets for large amounts of money in frivolous cases, and called for news outlets he disapproves of to lose their licenses.

He has pressured veteran news services out of the official briefing group for refusing to use language of his choosing, and he has gutted financial support for essential public media at domestically and vital independent media abroad.

Broader Implications

All of that has created an environment in which journalists are manifestly less safe in the US, but one in which their targeting – and indeed murder – becomes not just unimportant (“incidents occur”) but acceptable (“many individuals disliked that person”).

It is unsurprising that that year was the deadliest 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 journalist killings has created a culture of impunity in which journalists’ killers are literally able to escape punishment 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 recent period.

Effect on Society

The impact on society is deep. Attacks on journalists are assaults on facts. They are undermining of reality. They are violations of our rights to know and on our freedom to exist without fear and securely.

On Thursday, CPJ gathers for its yearly global journalism honors. My message there is the same as my message for Trump: these things may occur. But it is our responsibility to make sure they do not.