🔗 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 notorious journalist killing of the past ten years – and in so doing sank to a fresh depth in his disregard toward the press, for journalism – and for the facts.

The Context

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

The American spy agencies were not the sole entities to conclude the murder – which took place in the Saudi consulate in Turkey and in which the 59-year-old Khashoggi was drugged and cut apart – was approved at the highest levels. An investigation led by former UN expert, Agnès Callamard, reached similar conclusions.

Global Reactions

For a short time, nations were unified in their criticism of Saudi Arabia’s actions. The US imposed penalties and visa bans in that year over the murder, although it refrained of sanctioning the crown prince himself. Since then, the nation has been gradually restoring itself – and the crown prince’s visit to the US capital 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 anticipated. Not only did Trump fete the Saudi leader but he seemed to alter the facts – and then blamed the victim. The crown prince, Trump asserted when asked, knew nothing about the murder – in clear opposition to what his nation’s spy agencies determined previously. Moreover, Trump said: “A lot of people didn’t like that gentleman that you’re talking about, whether you like him or disapproved, incidents occur.”

Established Conduct

This represents a fresh and shameful low for a leader who has made no attempt to hide of his disdain for the facts – or for the press. He has smeared reporters (he called ABC news, whose journalist asked the question about Khashoggi at the Saudi press conference “fake news”), scolded them in public (he called one a “rude name” this week for asking about his relationship with the disgraced financier the convicted criminal), sued news outlets for large amounts of money in frivolous cases, and called for media groups he doesn’t like to be shut down.

He has pressured veteran news services out of the White House press pool for declining to use terminology of his choosing, and he has slashed funding for essential public media at home and vital independent media internationally.

Broader Implications

All of that has fostered an atmosphere in which journalists are clearly more vulnerable in the United States, but one in which their victimization – and indeed murder – becomes not just insignificant (“things happen”) but tolerated (“many individuals disliked that gentleman”).

It is no surprise that that year was the deadliest year on record for journalists in the over three decades the press freedom organization has been documenting this data: 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 escape punishment and so continue to do so.

In no place is this more evident than in Israel, which is responsible for the killing of over two hundred media workers in the past two years.

Societal Impact

The impact on the public is profound. Attacks on journalists are assaults on facts. They are attacks on facts. They are violations of our entitlement to information and on our freedom to live freely and securely.

This week, CPJ gathers for its yearly International Press Freedom awards. The statement there is the identical as my message for Trump: such events may occur. But it is our duty to make sure they cease.