🔗 Share this article

“Things happen.” Just two words. That’s all it took for the US president to effectively dismiss what is probably the most infamous journalist killing of the past ten years – and in so doing plumbed a new low in his disregard toward journalists, for the media – and for the facts.

Background Details

The US president’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 found in a recent assessment had ordered the abduction and murder of the Washington Post columnist in 2018. (Prince Mohammed has denied involvement.)

The American spy agencies were not the only ones to determine the homicide – which took place in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul and in which the late Khashoggi was sedated and dismembered – was signed off at the highest levels. An investigation led by then UN special rapporteur, the UN investigator, reached similar conclusions.

International Response

For a short time, governments were in agreement in their criticism of Saudi Arabia’s actions. The US enacted penalties and travel restrictions in 2021 over the murder, although it refrained of sanctioning the crown prince himself. Since then, the kingdom has been slowly rehabilitating itself – and the leader’s trip to Washington seemed to be the ultimate sign of that redemption.

Presidential Comments

Critics of the government had strongly criticized the meeting. But what was evident at the White House was more alarming than could have been imagined. Not only did Trump honor Prince Mohammed but he seemed to alter the facts – and then pointed fingers at the deceased. The crown prince, he asserted when asked, was unaware about the killing – in direct contradiction to what his country’s own spy agencies concluded previously. Moreover, the president said: “Many individuals didn’t like that gentleman that you’re talking about, whether you approve of him or didn’t like him, incidents occur.”

Pattern of Behavior

This marks a new and abject point for a leader who has made little secret of his contempt for the facts – or for the media. He has defamed journalists (he called ABC news, whose reporter asked the inquiry about Khashoggi at the Saudi press conference “fake news”), scolded them in public (he called one a “rude name” this week for asking about his connection 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 be shut down.

He has forced veteran news services out of the official briefing group for refusing to use language of his choosing, and he has gutted funding for vital news services at home and vital independent media abroad.

Broader Implications

All of that has created an atmosphere in which journalists are clearly more vulnerable in the US, but one in which their victimization – and indeed killing – becomes not just insignificant (“things happen”) but tolerated (“a lot of people 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 bring to justice those accountable for journalist killings has established a culture of impunity in which those who murder reporters are literally 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 accountable for the deaths of over two hundred media workers in the past two years.

Societal Impact

The effect on society is profound. Targeting reporters are assaults on facts. They are attacks on facts. They are attacks on our rights to know and on our liberty to live freely and securely.

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