🔗 Share this article

“Things happen.” Just two words. That was enough for the US president to effectively dismiss what is probably the most infamous journalist killing of the last decade – and in so doing sank to a fresh depth in his contempt for the press, for journalism – and for the facts.

Background Details

The American leader’s dismissive attitude of the killing of prominent journalist Jamal Khashoggi came during a press conference with the Saudi crown prince, 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. (Prince Mohammed has denied involvement.)

The US intelligence services were not the sole entities to conclude the homicide – which occurred in the Saudi diplomatic building in Istanbul and in which the late Khashoggi was drugged and dismembered – was signed off at the highest levels. An inquiry led by former UN expert, Agnès Callamard, reached comparable findings.

Global Reactions

For a short time, governments were in agreement in their condemnation of the kingdom’s conduct. The United States imposed sanctions and travel restrictions in that year over the murder, although it stopped short of penalizing the crown prince 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 regime had roundly condemned the meeting. But what was evident at the White House was more alarming than could have been imagined. Not only did Trump honor Prince Mohammed but he seemed to alter the facts – and then blamed the victim. The crown prince, he asserted when asked, knew nothing about the murder – in direct contradiction to what his nation’s intelligence services determined four years ago. Moreover, Trump said: “A lot of people disliked that person that you’re talking about, whether you approve of him or disapproved, things happen.”

Pattern of Behavior

This marks a fresh and shameful point for a leader who has made little secret of his contempt for the facts – or for the media. He has smeared reporters (he called a news network, whose journalist asked the inquiry about Khashoggi at the media event “fake news”), berated them in public (he called one a “rude name” this week for asking about his connection with the convicted sex offender 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 be shut down.

He has forced established media out of the White House press pool for refusing to use terminology 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 environment in which reporters are manifestly less safe in the US, but one in which their targeting – and indeed killing – becomes not just insignificant (“incidents occur”) but tolerated (“many individuals didn’t like that person”).

It is no surprise that 2024 was the most lethal year on file for the press in the over three decades the press freedom organization has been documenting this data: a persistent failure to bring to justice those responsible for reporter murders has created a environment without consequences in which journalists’ killers are actually able to get away with murder and so persist in these actions.

Nowhere is this clearer than in Israel, which is accountable for the killing of over two hundred journalists in the recent period.

Effect on Society

The effect on society is deep. Targeting reporters are attacks on the truth. They are undermining of reality. They are violations of our entitlement to information and on our freedom to live freely and safely.

This week, CPJ meets for its annual global journalism honors. My message there is the identical as my one for the president: these things may occur. But it is our responsibility to make sure they cease.