🔗 Share this article

“Stuff occurs.” A mere phrase. That’s all it took for the US president to effectively dismiss what is probably the most infamous murder of a reporter of the past ten years – and in so doing sank to a fresh depth in his contempt for the press, for journalism – and for the truth.

Background Details

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

The US intelligence services were not the only ones to conclude the murder – which occurred in the Saudi consulate in Turkey and in which the late Khashoggi was drugged and cut apart – was signed off at the top echelons. An investigation led by former UN expert, the UN investigator, reached similar conclusions.

International Response

For a brief period, governments were in agreement in their criticism of the kingdom’s conduct. The US imposed penalties and travel restrictions in that year over the murder, although it refrained of penalizing Prince Mohammed himself. Since then, the kingdom has been slowly rehabilitating itself – and the crown prince’s visit to Washington seemed to be the final confirmation of that redemption.

Presidential Comments

Critics of the regime had roundly condemned the visit. But what was on display at the White House was worse than could have been imagined. Not only did Trump fete Prince Mohammed but he effectively rewrote history – and then blamed the deceased. Prince Mohammed, Trump claimed when asked, was unaware about the murder – in direct contradiction to what his country’s own intelligence services determined four years ago. Moreover, Trump said: “Many individuals didn’t like that gentleman that you’re talking about, whether you approve of him or didn’t like him, things happen.”

Pattern of Behavior

This represents a fresh and shameful low for a leader who has made little secret of his disdain for the truth – or for the press. He has smeared reporters (he called ABC news, whose journalist asked the question about Khashoggi 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), taken legal action against media organizations for large amounts of money in vexatious law suits, and called for media groups he disapproves of to lose their licenses.

He has forced established media out of the White House press pool for refusing to use terminology of his preference, and he has slashed funding for vital news services at domestically and crucial free press abroad.

Broader Implications

All of that has created an environment in which reporters are clearly more vulnerable in the United States, but one in which their victimization – and indeed killing – becomes not just insignificant (“things happen”) but tolerated (“a lot of people disliked that gentleman”).

It is unsurprising that 2024 was the most lethal year on file for the press in the over three decades the press freedom organization has been documenting this information: a persistent failure to hold those responsible for reporter murders has created a environment without consequences in which those who murder reporters are literally able to escape punishment and so persist in these actions.

Nowhere is this more evident than in Israel, which is accountable for the killing of over two hundred media workers in the recent period.

Societal Impact

The effect on the public is deep. Attacks on journalists are attacks on the truth. They are attacks on facts. They are violations of our entitlement to information and on our freedom to exist without fear and securely.

This week, CPJ gathers for its yearly global journalism honors. My message there is the identical as my one for the president: these things may happen. But it is our responsibility to make sure they do not.