🔗 Share this article

“Things happen.” A mere phrase. That’s all it took for the US president to effectively dismiss what is arguably the most infamous murder of a reporter 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 truth.

The Context

The American leader’s dismissal of the killing of well-known reporter Jamal Khashoggi came during a press conference with the Saudi leader, Mohammed bin Salman – a man whom the CIA concluded in a recent assessment had ordered 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 only ones to conclude the homicide – which took place in the Saudi diplomatic building in Istanbul and in which the late journalist was drugged and dismembered – was approved at the top echelons. An investigation led by former UN expert, Agnès Callamard, reached similar conclusions.

Global Reactions

For a short time, governments were unified in their condemnation of Saudi Arabia’s actions. The US enacted penalties and visa bans in that year over the killing, although it refrained of sanctioning the crown prince 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 redemption.

White House Remarks

Critics of the government had roundly condemned the visit. But what was on display at the presidential residence 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 victim. The crown prince, Trump claimed when asked, knew nothing about the murder – in clear opposition to what his nation’s spy agencies determined previously. Moreover, the president said: “A lot of people didn’t like that person that you’re talking about, whether you approve of him or didn’t like him, incidents occur.”

Pattern of Behavior

This represents a new and abject point for a leader who has made little secret of his disdain for the facts – or for the press. He has smeared journalists (he called a news network, whose reporter asked the question about the journalist at the Saudi press conference “fake news”), berated them in public (he called one a “rude name” this week for asking about his relationship with the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein), taken legal action against news outlets for eye-watering sums of money in frivolous cases, and called for news outlets he disapproves of to lose their licenses.

He has forced veteran news services out of the official briefing group for declining to use terminology of his choosing, 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 journalists are clearly more vulnerable in the US, but one in which their victimization – and indeed murder – becomes not just insignificant (“things happen”) but tolerated (“a lot of people disliked that person”).

It is unsurprising that that year was the most lethal year on record for journalists in the more than 30 years the press freedom organization has been documenting this information: a persistent failure to hold those responsible for reporter murders has created a culture of impunity in which journalists’ killers are actually able to get away with murder and so persist in these actions.

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 effect on the public is profound. 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.

On Thursday, CPJ meets for its yearly global journalism honors. The statement there is the same as my message for Trump: such events may happen. But it is our responsibility to make sure they do not.