🔗 Share this article

“Incidents take place.” A mere phrase. That was enough for the US president to effectively dismiss what is arguably the most notorious journalist killing of the last decade – and in so doing sank to a fresh depth in his disregard toward journalists, for the media – and for the truth.

Background Details

The American leader’s dismissal of the killing 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 2021 report had orchestrated the kidnap and killing of the journalist in 2018. (The crown prince has rejected accusations.)

The American spy agencies were not the sole entities to conclude the murder – which took place in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul and in which the late Khashoggi was sedated and dismembered – was signed off at the highest levels. An investigation led by former UN expert, Agnès Callamard, reached comparable findings.

Global Reactions

For a brief period, nations were unified in their criticism of Saudi Arabia’s actions. The United States imposed sanctions and travel restrictions in that year over the murder, although it refrained of sanctioning Prince Mohammed 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 regime had strongly criticized the visit. But what was on display at the presidential residence was more alarming than could have been imagined. Not only did Trump fete the Saudi leader but he effectively rewrote history – and then blamed the victim. Prince Mohammed, Trump claimed when asked, was unaware about the murder – in clear opposition to what his nation’s spy agencies concluded four years ago. 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 marks a new and abject low for a leader who has made little secret of his contempt for the facts – or for the media. Trump has defamed journalists (he called ABC news, whose journalist asked the inquiry about the journalist at the Saudi press conference “fake news”), scolded them in public (he called one a “piggy” this week for asking about his connection with the convicted sex offender financier the convicted criminal), taken legal action against news outlets for eye-watering sums of money in vexatious law suits, and called for media groups he disapproves of to lose their licenses.

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

Wider Consequences

All of that has created an atmosphere in which journalists are manifestly less safe in the United States, but one in which their targeting – and indeed murder – becomes not just unimportant (“incidents occur”) but acceptable (“a lot of people disliked that gentleman”).

It is unsurprising that 2024 was the deadliest year on record for journalists in the over three decades the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) has been tracking this information: a persistent failure to hold those responsible for journalist killings has established a environment without consequences in which those who murder reporters are literally able to escape punishment and so persist in these actions.

Nowhere is this clearer than in the Middle Eastern nation, which is accountable for the deaths of more than 200 journalists in the recent period.

Effect on Society

The effect on society is profound. Targeting reporters are attacks on the truth. They are attacks on facts. They are attacks on our entitlement to information and on our liberty to exist without fear and safely.

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