🔗 Share this article

“Stuff occurs.” A mere phrase. That’s all it took for the US president to effectively dismiss what is arguably 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 facts.

Background Details

The American leader’s dismissal of the murder of well-known reporter the Washington Post columnist came during a press conference with the Saudi leader, Mohammed bin Salman – a man whom the CIA found in a recent assessment had orchestrated the kidnap and killing of the journalist in that year. (Prince Mohammed has denied involvement.)

The American spy agencies were not the only ones to conclude the homicide – which took place in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul and in which the 59-year-old Khashoggi was sedated and dismembered – was approved at the highest levels. An inquiry led by former UN expert, Agnès Callamard, reached similar conclusions.

Global Reactions

For a short time, nations were in agreement in their condemnation of the kingdom’s conduct. The US imposed penalties and travel restrictions in 2021 over the murder, although it stopped short of penalizing Prince Mohammed himself. Since then, the nation has been slowly rehabilitating itself – and the crown prince’s visit to Washington seemed to be the final confirmation of that redemption.

Presidential Comments

Opponents of the government had roundly condemned the meeting. But what was evident at the White House was worse than could have been anticipated. Not only did Trump honor the Saudi leader but he effectively rewrote the facts – and then pointed fingers at the victim. Prince Mohammed, he asserted when asked, knew nothing about the murder – in clear opposition to what his nation’s spy agencies determined previously. Moreover, Trump said: “Many individuals didn’t like that gentleman that you’re talking about, whether you like him or disapproved, incidents occur.”

Established Conduct

This represents a fresh and shameful low for a leader who has made no attempt to hide of his disdain for the truth – or for the press. He has defamed journalists (he called a news network, whose reporter asked the question about the journalist at the media event “false information”), scolded them in public (he called one a “piggy” 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 disapproves of to lose their licenses.

He has forced established media out of the official briefing group for declining 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 fostered an atmosphere in which journalists are clearly more vulnerable in the US, but one in which their targeting – and indeed murder – becomes not just insignificant (“things happen”) but acceptable (“many individuals didn’t like that gentleman”).

It is unsurprising that that year was the deadliest year on file for the press in the over three decades the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) has been tracking this data: a persistent failure to bring to justice those accountable for journalist killings has created a culture of impunity in which journalists’ killers are actually able to get away with murder and so persist in these actions.

Nowhere is this more evident than in the Middle Eastern nation, which is accountable for the killing of over two hundred journalists in the recent period.

Effect on Society

The effect on society is profound. Attacks on journalists are assaults on facts. They are undermining of reality. They are violations of our entitlement to information and on our freedom to exist without fear and safely.

On Thursday, CPJ meets for its yearly International Press Freedom awards. My message at the event is the same as my one for the president: these things may occur. But it is our duty to make sure they cease.