🔗 Share this article

“Stuff occurs.” A mere phrase. That was enough for the US president to brush off what is probably the most infamous murder of a reporter of the last decade – and in so doing plumbed a new low in his disregard toward journalists, for journalism – and for the facts.

The Context

The American leader’s dismissive attitude of the murder of well-known reporter Jamal Khashoggi came during a media briefing with the Saudi leader, MBS – a man whom the US intelligence found in a recent assessment had ordered the kidnap and killing of the Washington Post columnist in that year. (The crown prince has denied involvement.)

The American spy agencies were not the only ones to conclude the homicide – which took place in the Saudi consulate in Turkey and in which the 59-year-old journalist was drugged and dismembered – was signed off at the top echelons. An investigation led by former UN expert, Agnès Callamard, reached comparable findings.

International Response

For a short time, nations were unified in their condemnation of Saudi Arabia’s actions. The US enacted penalties and travel restrictions in that year over the killing, although it stopped short of penalizing Prince Mohammed himself. Since then, the nation has been gradually restoring itself – and the leader’s trip to Washington seemed to be the final confirmation of that rehabilitation.

White House Remarks

Critics of the regime had strongly criticized the meeting. But what was on display at the White House was more alarming than could have been anticipated. Not only did the president honor Prince Mohammed but he seemed to alter the facts – and then pointed fingers at the victim. Prince Mohammed, he asserted when asked, knew nothing about the killing – in clear opposition to what his nation’s spy agencies determined previously. Moreover, Trump said: “Many individuals didn’t like that person that you’re talking about, whether you like him or disapproved, things happen.”

Pattern of Behavior

This marks a new and abject point for a leader who has made no attempt to hide of his contempt 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 Saudi press conference “fake news”), scolded them in public (he called one a “rude name” this week for asking about his relationship with the disgraced financier the convicted criminal), sued 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 official briefing group for declining to use terminology of his preference, and he has gutted financial support for vital news services at home and vital independent media abroad.

Wider Consequences

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

It is unsurprising that 2024 was the most lethal year on record for journalists in the more than 30 years the press freedom organization has been tracking this data: a persistent failure to bring to justice those accountable 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.

In no place is this more evident than in Israel, which is responsible for the deaths 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 attacks on facts. They are attacks on our entitlement to information and on our freedom to live freely and securely.

On Thursday, the Committee to Protect Journalists gathers for its annual International Press Freedom awards. The statement there is the same as my one for the president: these things may happen. But it is our responsibility to make sure they do not.