🔗 Share this article

“Stuff occurs.” A mere phrase. That was enough for the US president to effectively dismiss what is probably the most infamous journalist killing of the last decade – and in so doing plumbed a new low in his disregard toward the press, for journalism – and for the truth.

Background Details

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

The American spy agencies were not the only ones to conclude the homicide – which occurred in the Saudi diplomatic building in Istanbul and in which the late journalist was sedated and cut apart – was signed off at the top echelons. An investigation led by former UN expert, the UN investigator, reached comparable findings.

International Response

For a brief period, governments were unified in their condemnation of the kingdom’s conduct. The US enacted penalties 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 redemption.

White House Remarks

Opponents of the government had strongly criticized the visit. But what was evident at the presidential residence was more alarming than could have been anticipated. Not only did the president honor the Saudi leader but he seemed to alter the facts – and then pointed fingers at the victim. The crown prince, he claimed when asked, knew nothing about the killing – in clear opposition to what his country’s own spy agencies determined four years ago. Moreover, the president said: “A lot of people disliked that gentleman that you’re talking about, whether you like him or disapproved, incidents occur.”

Established Conduct

This marks a fresh and shameful point for a president who has made no attempt to hide of his disdain for the truth – or for the media. He has smeared journalists (he called a news network, 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 relationship with the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein), 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 White House press pool for refusing to use language of his choosing, and he has gutted funding for vital news services at domestically and vital independent media internationally.

Wider Consequences

All of that has created an environment in which journalists are clearly more vulnerable in the United States, but one in which their victimization – and indeed murder – becomes not just unimportant (“things happen”) but acceptable (“a lot of people didn’t like that person”).

It is unsurprising that that year was the most lethal year on file for the press in the over three decades the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) has been tracking this information: a persistent failure to hold those accountable for journalist killings has established a environment without consequences in which those who murder reporters 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 responsible for the killing of more than 200 journalists in the recent period.

Effect on Society

The impact on society is profound. Attacks on journalists are assaults on facts. They are undermining of reality. They are attacks on our rights to know and on our liberty to exist without fear and safely.

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