🔗 Share this article

“Stuff occurs.” A mere phrase. That was enough for the US president to effectively dismiss what is arguably 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 the media – and for the truth.

Background Details

The American leader’s dismissive attitude of the killing of well-known reporter Jamal Khashoggi came during a press conference with the Saudi crown prince, 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 rejected accusations.)

The American spy agencies were not the only ones to determine the murder – which occurred in the Saudi diplomatic building in Istanbul and in which the 59-year-old Khashoggi was drugged and dismembered – was approved at the highest levels. An investigation led by former UN expert, the UN investigator, reached similar conclusions.

Global Reactions

For a brief period, nations were unified in their condemnation of the kingdom’s conduct. The United States imposed sanctions and visa bans in that year over the killing, although it stopped short of sanctioning 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

Critics of the regime had strongly criticized the visit. But what was evident at the White House was worse than could have been anticipated. Not only did the president fete the Saudi leader but he seemed to alter the facts – and then blamed the victim. Prince Mohammed, he asserted when asked, knew nothing about the killing – in direct contradiction to what his nation’s intelligence services concluded previously. Moreover, the president said: “A lot of people didn’t like that person that you’re talking about, whether you like him or disapproved, things happen.”

Pattern of Behavior

This represents a fresh and shameful point for a president who has made little secret of his disdain for the facts – or for the media. He has defamed reporters (he called ABC news, whose reporter asked the question about Khashoggi at the Saudi press conference “false information”), scolded them in public (he called one a “rude name” this week for asking about his relationship with the convicted sex offender financier Jeffrey Epstein), sued news outlets for eye-watering sums of money in frivolous cases, and called for news outlets he disapproves of to be shut down.

He has pressured veteran news services out of the official briefing group for declining to use terminology of his preference, and he has slashed funding for essential public media at domestically and crucial free press internationally.

Wider Consequences

All of that has created an atmosphere in which journalists are manifestly less safe in the US, but one in which their victimization – and indeed murder – becomes not just unimportant (“things happen”) but tolerated (“many individuals didn’t like that person”).

It is unsurprising that 2024 was the deadliest year on record for the press in the more than 30 years the press freedom organization has been tracking this data: a ongoing neglect to hold those responsible for reporter murders has established a culture of impunity in which those who murder reporters are literally able to escape punishment and so persist in these actions.

In no place is this more evident than in the Middle Eastern nation, which is responsible for the killing of more than 200 journalists in the past two years.

Effect on Society

The impact 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 liberty to live freely and safely.

This week, the Committee to Protect Journalists gathers for its annual International Press Freedom awards. My message at the event is the same as my one for Trump: such events may occur. But it is our duty to make sure they do not.