🔗 Share this article

“Stuff occurs.” Just two words. That was enough for the US president to effectively dismiss what is probably the most notorious murder of a reporter of the last decade – and in so doing sank to a fresh depth in his contempt for journalists, for the media – and for the facts.

The Context

The US president’s dismissal of the killing of prominent journalist the Washington Post columnist came during a media briefing with the Saudi leader, MBS – a man whom the US intelligence found in a recent assessment had orchestrated the abduction and murder of the Washington Post columnist in 2018. (The crown prince has denied involvement.)

The American spy agencies were not the only ones to conclude the homicide – which took place in the Saudi diplomatic building in Istanbul and in which the late journalist was sedated and cut apart – was signed off at the top echelons. An inquiry led by then UN special rapporteur, the UN investigator, reached comparable findings.

Global Reactions

For a brief period, nations were in agreement in their condemnation of Saudi Arabia’s actions. The US imposed sanctions and travel restrictions in 2021 over the murder, although it stopped short 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 ultimate sign of that rehabilitation.

Presidential Comments

Opponents of the government had roundly condemned the meeting. But what was on display 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 blamed the deceased. Prince Mohammed, Trump claimed when asked, knew nothing about the killing – in clear opposition to what his nation’s intelligence services concluded four years ago. Moreover, the president said: “Many individuals didn’t like that person that you’re talking about, whether you like him or didn’t like him, things happen.”

Established Conduct

This marks a new and abject low for a leader who has made no attempt to hide of his contempt for the truth – or for the media. He has defamed journalists (he called a news network, whose journalist asked the question about Khashoggi at the media event “false information”), scolded them in open settings (he called one a “rude name” this week for asking about his connection with the disgraced financier the convicted criminal), taken legal action against media organizations for eye-watering sums of money in vexatious law suits, and called for media groups he doesn’t like to be shut down.

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

Wider Consequences

All of that has fostered an atmosphere in which reporters are clearly more vulnerable in the US, but one in which their victimization – and indeed murder – becomes not just insignificant (“incidents occur”) but tolerated (“many individuals disliked that person”).

It is unsurprising that 2024 was the deadliest year on file for journalists in the over three decades the press freedom organization has been tracking this information: a ongoing neglect to hold those accountable for reporter murders has created a culture of impunity in which those who murder reporters are actually able to get away with murder and so persist in these actions.

Nowhere is this clearer than in the Middle Eastern nation, which is accountable for the killing of over two hundred media workers in the recent period.

Effect on Society

The effect on society is deep. Targeting reporters are attacks on the truth. They are attacks on facts. They are attacks on our entitlement to information and on our liberty to exist without fear and safely.

On Thursday, CPJ meets for its annual global journalism honors. My message at the event is the identical as my one for the president: these things may occur. But it is our duty to make sure they do not.