🔗 Share this article

“Stuff occurs.” Just two words. That was enough for Donald Trump to effectively dismiss what is probably the most infamous murder of a reporter of the last decade – and in so doing plumbed a new low in his contempt for the press, for journalism – and for the facts.

Background Details

The American leader’s dismissal of the killing of well-known reporter Jamal Khashoggi came during a press conference with the Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman – a man whom the CIA concluded in a recent assessment had ordered the abduction and murder of the journalist in that year. (The crown prince has denied involvement.)

The American spy agencies were not the only ones to determine the homicide – which occurred in the Saudi consulate in Turkey and in which the 59-year-old journalist was drugged and dismembered – was signed off at the highest levels. An investigation led by former UN expert, Agnès Callamard, reached similar conclusions.

International Response

For a short time, nations were unified in their criticism of the kingdom’s conduct. The United States imposed sanctions and travel restrictions in 2021 over the killing, although it refrained of sanctioning Prince Mohammed himself. Since then, the kingdom has been gradually restoring itself – and the crown prince’s visit to Washington seemed to be the ultimate sign of that redemption.

White House Remarks

Critics of the government had roundly condemned the meeting. But what was evident at the White House was worse than could have been imagined. Not only did Trump fete the Saudi leader but he seemed to alter the facts – and then blamed the victim. The crown prince, he asserted when asked, was unaware about the murder – in direct contradiction to what his nation’s intelligence services determined four years ago. Moreover, Trump said: “Many individuals didn’t like that person 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 no attempt to hide of his disdain for the truth – or for the media. He has smeared reporters (he called a news network, whose reporter asked the inquiry about the journalist at the media event “false information”), scolded them in open settings (he called one a “rude name” this week for asking about his relationship with the convicted sex offender financier the convicted criminal), taken legal action against news outlets for eye-watering sums of money in frivolous cases, and called for media groups he disapproves of to be shut down.

He has forced veteran news services 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 home and crucial free press abroad.

Broader Implications

All of that has created 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 (“incidents occur”) but tolerated (“a lot of people disliked that gentleman”).

It is unsurprising that that year was the most lethal year on record for the press in the more than 30 years the press freedom organization has been tracking this data: a ongoing neglect 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.

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

Effect on Society

The effect on society is deep. Attacks on journalists are assaults on facts. They are undermining of reality. They are violations of our entitlement to information and on our liberty to live freely and securely.

On Thursday, CPJ meets for its annual International Press Freedom awards. My message there is the same as my one for the president: such events may happen. But it is our duty to make sure they cease.