🔗 Share this article

“Incidents take place.” A mere phrase. That’s all it took for the US president to brush off what is probably the most infamous journalist killing of the past ten years – and in so doing sank to a fresh depth in his disregard toward journalists, for journalism – and for the facts.

Background Details

The American leader’s dismissal of the killing of prominent journalist the Washington Post columnist came during a media briefing with the Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman – a man whom the CIA concluded in a 2021 report had ordered the abduction and murder of the journalist in 2018. (The crown prince has rejected accusations.)

The American spy agencies were not the sole entities to conclude the murder – which took place in the Saudi diplomatic building in Turkey and in which the 59-year-old Khashoggi was drugged and cut apart – was approved at the top echelons. An inquiry led by then UN special rapporteur, the UN investigator, reached comparable findings.

International Response

For a short time, nations were in agreement in their condemnation of Saudi Arabia’s actions. The US imposed sanctions and visa bans in 2021 over the murder, although it stopped short of sanctioning Prince Mohammed himself. Since then, the kingdom has been gradually restoring itself – and the leader’s trip to Washington seemed to be the final confirmation of that rehabilitation.

Presidential Comments

Critics of the regime had strongly criticized the visit. But what was on display at the presidential residence was worse than could have been imagined. Not only did Trump fete the Saudi leader but he seemed to alter the facts – and then pointed fingers at the deceased. Prince Mohammed, Trump asserted when asked, knew nothing about the murder – in clear opposition to what his nation’s spy agencies determined four years ago. Moreover, Trump said: “Many individuals didn’t like that person that you’re talking about, whether you like him or disapproved, things happen.”

Established Conduct

This represents a new and abject point for a president who has made little secret of his disdain for the facts – or for the press. Trump has defamed reporters (he called a news network, whose reporter asked the question about Khashoggi 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 the convicted criminal), sued media organizations for large amounts of money in vexatious law suits, and called for media groups he disapproves of to be shut down.

He has pressured veteran news services out of the official briefing group for refusing to use terminology of his choosing, and he has slashed financial support for vital news services at domestically and vital independent media internationally.

Broader Implications

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

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 documenting this information: a persistent failure to hold those responsible for journalist killings has established a culture of impunity in which those who murder reporters are literally able to get away with murder and so persist in these actions.

Nowhere is this clearer than in the Middle Eastern nation, which is accountable for the killing of over two hundred media workers in the past two years.

Effect on Society

The effect on the public is profound. Attacks on journalists are assaults on facts. They are attacks on facts. They are attacks on our rights to know and on our liberty to exist without fear and safely.

This week, CPJ gathers for its annual global journalism honors. My message there is the same as my one for Trump: these things may occur. But it is our duty to make sure they do not.