🔗 Share this article

“Incidents take place.” Just two words. That was enough for Donald Trump to effectively dismiss what is arguably the most notorious murder of a reporter of the last decade – and in so doing plumbed a new low in his disregard toward journalists, for journalism – and for the truth.

The Context

The American leader’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 2021 report had orchestrated the kidnap and killing of the journalist in that year. (The crown prince has denied involvement.)

The US intelligence services were not the only ones to conclude the murder – which occurred in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul 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 brief period, governments were in agreement in their criticism of Saudi Arabia’s actions. The United States enacted penalties and visa bans in that year over the killing, although it refrained of sanctioning Prince Mohammed himself. Since then, the nation has been gradually restoring itself – and the crown prince’s visit to Washington seemed to be the final confirmation of that rehabilitation.

Presidential Comments

Critics of the government had roundly condemned the visit. But what was evident at the White House was worse than could have been anticipated. Not only did the president honor Prince Mohammed but he seemed to alter the facts – and then pointed fingers at the deceased. Prince Mohammed, he asserted when asked, knew nothing about the killing – in clear opposition to what his nation’s spy agencies concluded four years ago. Moreover, the president said: “Many individuals didn’t like that person that you’re talking about, whether you approve of him or didn’t like him, 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 press. He has defamed reporters (he called ABC news, whose reporter asked the question about Khashoggi at the Saudi press conference “false information”), berated them in open settings (he called one a “piggy” this week for asking about his relationship with the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein), sued media organizations for large amounts of money in frivolous cases, and called for news outlets he disapproves of to be shut down.

He has pressured established media out of the White House press pool for declining to use terminology of his preference, and he has gutted funding for essential public media at domestically and crucial free press internationally.

Broader Implications

All of that has created an atmosphere in which reporters are clearly more vulnerable in the US, but one in which their targeting – and indeed murder – becomes not just unimportant (“things happen”) but tolerated (“many individuals disliked that person”).

It is no surprise that that year was the most lethal year on record for journalists in the over three decades the press freedom organization has been documenting this information: a ongoing neglect to hold those accountable for reporter murders has created a environment without consequences 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 Israel, which is accountable for the killing of more than 200 journalists in the recent period.

Societal Impact

The impact on the public is profound. Attacks on journalists are attacks on the truth. They are undermining of reality. They are violations of our rights to know and on our liberty to exist without fear and safely.

On Thursday, CPJ gathers for its annual global journalism honors. My message there is the identical as my one for the president: such events may happen. But it is our responsibility to make sure they cease.