🔗 Share this article

“Stuff occurs.” A mere phrase. That’s all it took for the US president 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 the press, for the media – and for the facts.

The Context

The American leader’s dismissive attitude of the murder of prominent journalist Jamal Khashoggi came during a press conference with the Saudi leader, MBS – a man whom the CIA concluded in a recent assessment had orchestrated 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 sole entities to conclude the murder – which occurred in the Saudi consulate in Turkey and in which the 59-year-old journalist was sedated and cut apart – was signed off at the highest levels. An investigation led by former UN expert, Agnès Callamard, reached comparable findings.

International Response

For a short time, nations were in agreement in their condemnation of the kingdom’s conduct. The US imposed sanctions and travel restrictions in that year over the murder, although it stopped short of sanctioning the crown prince himself. Since then, the kingdom has been gradually restoring itself – and the leader’s trip to the US capital seemed to be the ultimate sign of that redemption.

White House Remarks

Opponents of the government had strongly criticized the visit. But what was on display at the White House was worse than could have been imagined. Not only did Trump fete the Saudi leader but he seemed to alter history – and then blamed the victim. Prince Mohammed, Trump asserted when asked, was unaware about the killing – in direct contradiction to what his country’s own intelligence services concluded previously. Moreover, Trump said: “Many individuals didn’t like that person that you’re talking about, whether you like him or didn’t like him, things happen.”

Established Conduct

This marks a new and abject low for a president who has made no attempt to hide of his disdain for the truth – or for the media. Trump has smeared journalists (he called ABC news, whose journalist asked the question about the journalist 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 Jeffrey Epstein), sued news outlets 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 official briefing group for refusing to use language of his preference, and he has gutted financial support for vital news services at home and vital independent media internationally.

Broader Implications

All of that has fostered an environment in which journalists are manifestly less safe in the United States, but one in which their targeting – and indeed murder – becomes not just insignificant (“things happen”) but acceptable (“many individuals didn’t like that person”).

It is no surprise that that year was the deadliest year on record for journalists in the more than 30 years the press freedom organization has been tracking this data: a persistent failure to hold those responsible for reporter murders has created a environment without consequences in which those who murder reporters are literally able to get away with murder and so continue to do so.

In no place is this more evident than in Israel, which is responsible for the deaths of more than 200 media workers in the past two years.

Societal Impact

The impact on society is profound. Targeting reporters are attacks on the truth. They are undermining of reality. They are violations of our rights to know and on our freedom to live freely and securely.

On Thursday, the Committee to Protect Journalists gathers for its annual global journalism honors. My message there is the identical as my message for Trump: such events may happen. But it is our responsibility to make sure they do not.