🔗 Share this article

“Incidents take place.” A mere phrase. That’s all it took for the US president to brush off what is arguably the most infamous journalist killing of the past ten years – and in so doing plumbed a new low in his contempt for the press, for the media – and for the truth.

Background Details

The American leader’s dismissive attitude of the killing of prominent journalist the Washington Post columnist came during a press conference with the Saudi leader, MBS – a man whom the CIA found in a recent assessment had orchestrated the abduction and murder of the Washington Post columnist in that year. (The crown prince has denied involvement.)

The US intelligence services were not the sole entities to conclude the homicide – 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, the UN investigator, reached similar conclusions.

International Response

For a brief period, governments were in agreement in their condemnation of Saudi Arabia’s actions. The US imposed penalties and visa bans in that year over the killing, although it stopped short of sanctioning Prince Mohammed himself. Since then, the kingdom has been gradually restoring itself – and the crown prince’s visit to the US capital seemed to be the final confirmation of that rehabilitation.

Presidential Comments

Critics 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 the president honor Prince Mohammed but he seemed to alter the facts – and then pointed fingers at the victim. Prince Mohammed, Trump claimed when asked, was unaware about the killing – in direct contradiction to what his nation’s intelligence services determined four years ago. Moreover, Trump said: “Many individuals disliked that gentleman that you’re talking about, whether you like him or disapproved, incidents occur.”

Pattern of Behavior

This marks 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 a news network, whose journalist asked the question about Khashoggi at the Saudi press conference “fake news”), scolded them in open settings (he called one a “rude name” this week for asking about his connection with the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein), sued media organizations for large amounts of money in frivolous cases, and called for news outlets he doesn’t like to lose their licenses.

He has pressured established media out of the official briefing group for declining to use language of his preference, and he has slashed funding for vital news services at home and crucial free press abroad.

Wider Consequences

All of that has created an environment in which reporters are manifestly less safe in the US, but one in which their targeting – and indeed murder – becomes not just insignificant (“incidents occur”) but acceptable (“many individuals disliked that person”).

It is unsurprising that 2024 was the deadliest year on file for journalists in the over three decades the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) has been tracking this information: a ongoing neglect to bring to justice those accountable for reporter murders has established a environment without consequences in which those who murder reporters are actually able to get away with murder and so continue to do so.

Nowhere is this more evident than in Israel, which is responsible for the deaths of over two hundred journalists in the past two years.

Societal Impact

The effect on the public is deep. Targeting reporters are assaults on facts. They are attacks on facts. They are violations of our rights to know and on our freedom to exist without fear and safely.

This week, CPJ meets for its annual International Press Freedom awards. My message there is the identical as my message for Trump: these things may occur. But it is our duty to make sure they do not.