🔗 Share this article

“Incidents take place.” Just two words. That was enough 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 contempt for the press, for the media – and for the truth.

The Context

The US president’s dismissive attitude of the killing of well-known reporter Jamal Khashoggi came during a press conference with the Saudi leader, MBS – a man whom the CIA concluded in a recent assessment had orchestrated the kidnap and killing of the Washington Post columnist in 2018. (The crown prince has rejected accusations.)

The American spy agencies were not the sole entities to determine the murder – which occurred in the Saudi diplomatic building in Turkey and in which the 59-year-old journalist 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.

Global Reactions

For a brief period, nations were in agreement in their condemnation of Saudi Arabia’s actions. The US imposed penalties and visa bans in that year over the murder, although it stopped short of sanctioning Prince Mohammed himself. Since then, the kingdom has been slowly rehabilitating itself – and the leader’s trip to the US capital seemed to be the final confirmation of that redemption.

White House Remarks

Critics of the government had roundly condemned the visit. But what was on display 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 blamed the deceased. Prince Mohammed, Trump claimed when asked, knew nothing about the killing – in clear opposition to what his country’s own intelligence services determined four years ago. Moreover, Trump said: “Many individuals disliked that gentleman that you’re talking about, whether you approve of him or didn’t like him, things happen.”

Established Conduct

This marks a new and abject low for a president who has made little secret of his contempt for the truth – or for the media. Trump has smeared reporters (he called ABC news, whose journalist asked the inquiry about the journalist at the Saudi press conference “fake news”), scolded them in open settings (he called one a “rude name” this week for asking about his connection with the convicted sex offender financier Jeffrey Epstein), taken legal action against media organizations for eye-watering sums of money in vexatious law suits, and called for media groups he doesn’t like to lose their licenses.

He has pressured established media out of the official briefing group for declining to use language of his preference, and he has gutted financial support for vital news services at home and vital independent media abroad.

Broader Implications

All of that has fostered an environment in which journalists are manifestly less safe in the United States, but one in which their victimization – and indeed murder – becomes not just unimportant (“things happen”) but acceptable (“many individuals didn’t like that person”).

It is no surprise that that year was the most lethal year on file for the press in the over three decades the press freedom organization has been documenting this information: a ongoing neglect to hold those accountable for reporter murders has created a culture of impunity in which those who murder reporters are actually able to get away with murder and so continue to do so.

In no place is this clearer than in Israel, which is responsible for the deaths of over two hundred journalists in the recent period.

Societal Impact

The impact 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 freedom to exist without fear and safely.

On Thursday, the Committee to Protect Journalists meets for its yearly International Press Freedom awards. My message at the event is the same as my one for Trump: such events may occur. But it is our duty to make sure they cease.