🔗 Share this article

“Stuff occurs.” Just two words. That was enough for the US president to brush off what is arguably the most infamous journalist killing 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 dismissal of the killing of prominent journalist the Washington Post columnist came during a media briefing with the Saudi leader, Mohammed bin Salman – a man whom the CIA found in a recent assessment had orchestrated 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 consulate in Istanbul and in which the late journalist was drugged and dismembered – was approved at the top echelons. An inquiry led by former UN expert, Agnès Callamard, reached similar conclusions.

International Response

For a short time, governments were unified in their criticism of Saudi Arabia’s actions. The US imposed penalties and travel restrictions in that year over the murder, although it stopped short of penalizing 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 rehabilitation.

White House Remarks

Opponents of the government had roundly condemned the visit. But what was on display at the presidential residence was worse than could have been imagined. Not only did Trump honor Prince Mohammed but he effectively rewrote the facts – and then blamed the deceased. The crown prince, Trump claimed when asked, knew nothing about the murder – in direct contradiction to what his nation’s spy agencies determined four years ago. Moreover, the president said: “Many individuals disliked that person that you’re talking about, whether you approve of him or disapproved, incidents occur.”

Established Conduct

This represents a new and abject point for a president who has made little secret of his contempt for the facts – or for the media. Trump has defamed journalists (he called a news network, whose journalist asked the question about Khashoggi at the media event “fake news”), berated 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 news outlets for large amounts of money in vexatious law suits, and called for media groups 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 choosing, and he has gutted funding for essential public media at domestically and crucial free press internationally.

Broader Implications

All of that has fostered 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 (“many individuals disliked that person”).

It is unsurprising that 2024 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 journalist killings has established a culture of impunity in which those who murder reporters are actually 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 media workers in the recent period.

Effect on Society

The effect on the public is deep. Targeting reporters are assaults on facts. They are undermining of reality. They are violations of our entitlement to information and on our freedom to live freely and securely.

This week, the Committee to Protect Journalists gathers for its yearly International Press Freedom awards. The statement there is the identical as my one for Trump: such events may occur. But it is our responsibility to make sure they do not.