🔗 Share this article

“Incidents take place.” Just two words. That was enough for the US president to effectively dismiss what is arguably the most notorious journalist killing of the last decade – and in so doing plumbed a new low in his disregard toward the press, for the media – and for the facts.

The Context

The American leader’s dismissal of the killing of prominent journalist Jamal Khashoggi came during a media briefing with the Saudi leader, Mohammed bin Salman – a man whom the CIA concluded in a recent assessment had orchestrated the kidnap and killing of the Washington Post columnist in 2018. (Prince Mohammed has denied involvement.)

The American spy agencies were not the sole entities to determine the murder – which occurred in the Saudi consulate in Turkey and in which the 59-year-old journalist was sedated and dismembered – was signed off at the highest levels. An investigation led by former UN expert, Agnès Callamard, reached comparable findings.

International Response

For a brief period, nations were unified in their criticism of the kingdom’s conduct. The US enacted penalties and travel restrictions in 2021 over the murder, although it refrained of sanctioning Prince Mohammed himself. Since then, the kingdom has been gradually restoring itself – and the leader’s trip to the US capital seemed to be the ultimate sign of that redemption.

White House Remarks

Opponents of the regime had strongly criticized the visit. But what was evident at the White House was worse than could have been anticipated. Not only did Trump fete the Saudi leader but he seemed to alter history – and then pointed fingers at the victim. Prince Mohammed, he claimed when asked, was unaware about the murder – in clear opposition to what his nation’s spy agencies concluded four years ago. Moreover, Trump said: “A lot of people disliked that gentleman that you’re talking about, whether you approve of him or disapproved, incidents occur.”

Established Conduct

This represents a new and abject low for a president who has made no attempt to hide of his contempt for the facts – or for the press. Trump has smeared journalists (he called ABC news, whose reporter asked the question about the journalist at the media event “fake news”), scolded them in public (he called one a “piggy” this week for asking about his relationship with the disgraced financier the convicted criminal), taken legal action against media organizations for large amounts of money in frivolous cases, 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 preference, and he has gutted funding for vital news services at domestically and crucial free press abroad.

Broader Implications

All of that has created an atmosphere in which reporters are manifestly less safe in the US, but one in which their victimization – and indeed killing – becomes not just insignificant (“incidents occur”) but acceptable (“many individuals disliked 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 hold those responsible for journalist killings has created a environment without consequences in which journalists’ killers are literally able to get away with murder and so continue to do so.

In no place is this more evident than in Israel, which is responsible for the deaths of more than 200 journalists in the recent period.

Effect on Society

The impact on the public is deep. Targeting reporters are assaults on facts. They are undermining of reality. They are attacks on our rights to know and on our liberty to live freely and safely.

On Thursday, the Committee to Protect Journalists meets for its yearly global journalism honors. My message there is the same as my message for Trump: these things may happen. But it is our duty to make sure they cease.