🔗 Share this article

“Incidents take place.” Just two words. That was enough for Donald Trump to effectively dismiss what is probably the most infamous murder of a reporter of the last decade – and in so doing plumbed a new low in his contempt for journalists, for the media – and for the facts.

The Context

The US president’s dismissal of the killing of prominent journalist the Washington Post columnist 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 kidnap and killing of the Washington Post columnist in 2018. (The crown prince has rejected accusations.)

The American spy agencies were not the sole entities to conclude the homicide – which took place in the Saudi diplomatic building in Istanbul and in which the 59-year-old journalist was drugged and cut apart – was approved at the highest levels. An inquiry led by former UN expert, the UN investigator, reached similar conclusions.

Global Reactions

For a brief period, governments were unified in their criticism of the kingdom’s conduct. The United States imposed penalties and travel restrictions in that year over the murder, although it stopped short of sanctioning Prince Mohammed himself. Since then, the nation has been slowly rehabilitating itself – and the leader’s trip to the US capital seemed to be the final confirmation of that redemption.

White House Remarks

Critics of the regime had roundly condemned the meeting. But what was evident at the White House was worse than could have been imagined. Not only did Trump fete Prince Mohammed but he effectively rewrote history – and then pointed fingers at the victim. Prince Mohammed, he claimed when asked, knew nothing about the murder – in direct contradiction to what his country’s own intelligence services concluded previously. Moreover, the president said: “Many individuals disliked that person that you’re talking about, whether you like him or disapproved, incidents occur.”

Established Conduct

This marks a new and abject point for a leader who has made little secret of his contempt for the truth – or for the press. He has defamed journalists (he called ABC news, whose reporter asked the question about Khashoggi at the media event “false information”), scolded them in public (he called one a “rude name” this week for asking about his relationship with the disgraced financier the convicted criminal), taken legal action against media organizations for eye-watering sums of money in frivolous cases, 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 terminology of his preference, and he has gutted funding for essential public media at domestically and vital independent media internationally.

Wider Consequences

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

It is no surprise that that year was the deadliest year on file for the press in the over three decades the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) has been documenting this data: a ongoing neglect to hold those accountable for journalist killings has created a culture of impunity in which journalists’ killers are literally able to get away with murder and so persist in these actions.

Nowhere is this more evident than in Israel, which is accountable for the deaths of over two hundred media workers in the recent period.

Effect on Society

The impact on society is profound. Targeting reporters are assaults on facts. They are undermining of reality. They are attacks on our rights to know and on our liberty to exist without fear and safely.

This week, CPJ gathers for its yearly International Press Freedom awards. My message there is the identical as my one for the president: these things may happen. But it is our duty to make sure they do not.