🔗 Share this article

“Incidents take place.” A mere phrase. That was enough 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 facts.

The Context

The American leader’s dismissal of the murder of prominent journalist Jamal Khashoggi came during a press conference with the Saudi crown prince, MBS – a man whom the US intelligence concluded in a recent assessment had ordered the kidnap and killing of the Washington Post columnist in that year. (The crown prince has denied involvement.)

The American spy agencies were not the only ones to determine the homicide – which occurred in the Saudi diplomatic building in Turkey and in which the late Khashoggi was sedated and dismembered – was signed off at the highest levels. An inquiry led by former UN expert, Agnès Callamard, reached similar conclusions.

Global Reactions

For a brief period, nations were in agreement in their criticism of the kingdom’s conduct. The US imposed sanctions and visa bans in that year over the killing, although it stopped short of penalizing 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 redemption.

White House Remarks

Critics of the government had strongly criticized the visit. But what was on display at the presidential residence was worse than could have been imagined. Not only did Trump fete the Saudi leader but he effectively rewrote the facts – and then pointed fingers at the deceased. The crown prince, Trump asserted when asked, was unaware about the murder – in direct contradiction to what his country’s own spy agencies concluded four years ago. Moreover, Trump said: “A lot of people didn’t like that person that you’re talking about, whether you like him or disapproved, incidents occur.”

Pattern of Behavior

This represents a new and abject low for a president who has made no attempt to hide of his disdain for the facts – or for the press. Trump has smeared journalists (he called ABC news, whose reporter asked the inquiry about the journalist at the Saudi press conference “false information”), berated them in public (he called one a “rude name” this week for asking about his connection with the disgraced financier the convicted criminal), sued news outlets for large amounts of money in vexatious law suits, and called for media groups he disapproves of to be shut down.

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

Broader Implications

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

It is no surprise that that year was the most lethal year on record for journalists in the more than 30 years the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) has been documenting this data: a ongoing neglect to bring to justice those responsible for journalist killings 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 more evident than in the Middle Eastern nation, which is accountable for the killing of over two hundred media workers in the recent period.

Societal Impact

The impact on society is deep. Targeting reporters are assaults on facts. They are attacks on facts. They are violations of our entitlement to information and on our freedom to live freely and safely.

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