🔗 Share this article

“Things happen.” A mere phrase. That was enough for the US president to effectively dismiss what is probably the most notorious journalist killing of the past ten years – and in so doing sank to a fresh depth in his contempt for journalists, for journalism – and for the facts.

The Context

The American leader’s dismissive attitude of the killing of prominent journalist Jamal Khashoggi came during a media briefing with the Saudi leader, MBS – a man whom the US intelligence concluded in a 2021 report had orchestrated the abduction and murder of the journalist in that year. (The crown prince has denied involvement.)

The US intelligence services were not the sole entities to determine the homicide – which occurred in the Saudi diplomatic building in Turkey and in which the 59-year-old Khashoggi was drugged and cut apart – was signed off at the highest levels. An investigation led by then UN special rapporteur, Agnès Callamard, reached comparable findings.

International Response

For a short time, governments were in agreement in their criticism of the kingdom’s conduct. The United States enacted penalties and visa bans in 2021 over the killing, although it stopped short of sanctioning Prince Mohammed himself. Since then, the nation has been slowly rehabilitating itself – and the leader’s trip to Washington seemed to be the final confirmation of that rehabilitation.

Presidential Comments

Opponents of the government had roundly condemned the visit. But what was evident at the White House was more alarming than could have been imagined. Not only did Trump fete the Saudi leader but he seemed to alter history – and then pointed fingers at the deceased. The crown prince, Trump claimed when asked, was unaware about the murder – in clear opposition to what his nation’s spy agencies concluded previously. Moreover, Trump 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 new and abject low for a leader who has made no attempt to hide of his contempt for the facts – or for the media. He has defamed reporters (he called ABC news, whose reporter asked the question about the journalist at the media event “fake news”), berated them in open settings (he called one a “rude name” this week for asking about his connection with the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein), taken legal action against news outlets for eye-watering sums 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 declining to use language of his choosing, and he has gutted financial support for vital news services at domestically and vital independent media internationally.

Wider Consequences

All of that has fostered 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 (“a lot of people disliked that person”).

It is unsurprising that that year was the most lethal year on file for journalists in the more than 30 years the press freedom organization has been tracking this information: a ongoing neglect to bring to justice those responsible for reporter murders has created a environment without consequences in which journalists’ killers are actually able to get away with murder and so continue to do so.

Nowhere is this more evident than in the Middle Eastern nation, which is responsible for the deaths of more than 200 journalists in the past two years.

Effect on Society

The impact on society is deep. Targeting reporters are attacks on the truth. They are undermining of reality. They are attacks on our rights to know and on our freedom to live freely and safely.

On Thursday, the Committee to Protect Journalists meets for its annual International Press Freedom awards. The statement there is the same as my message for the president: these things may happen. But it is our responsibility to make sure they do not.