🔗 Share this article

“Stuff occurs.” A mere phrase. That’s all it took for the US president to effectively dismiss what is arguably the most notorious journalist killing of the past ten years – and in so doing sank to a fresh depth in his contempt for journalists, for journalism – and for the facts.

The Context

The US president’s dismissal of the murder of well-known reporter Jamal Khashoggi came during a media briefing with the Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman – a man whom the CIA found in a 2021 report had orchestrated the abduction and murder of the journalist in 2018. (Prince Mohammed has denied involvement.)

The US intelligence services were not the sole entities to conclude the murder – which occurred in the Saudi diplomatic building in Istanbul and in which the late Khashoggi was drugged and dismembered – was approved at the highest levels. An investigation led by then UN special rapporteur, the UN investigator, reached similar conclusions.

Global Reactions

For a short time, governments were in agreement in their criticism of Saudi Arabia’s actions. The US imposed sanctions and travel restrictions in 2021 over the murder, although it refrained of sanctioning the crown prince himself. Since then, the nation has been slowly rehabilitating itself – and the crown prince’s visit to the US capital seemed to be the ultimate sign of that rehabilitation.

White House Remarks

Opponents of the regime had strongly criticized the visit. But what was evident at the White House was worse than could have been imagined. Not only did Trump fete the Saudi leader but he seemed to alter the facts – and then pointed fingers at the victim. Prince Mohammed, he claimed when asked, knew nothing about the killing – in clear opposition to what his nation’s intelligence services determined four years ago. Moreover, the president said: “A lot of people didn’t like that person that you’re talking about, whether you like him or disapproved, things happen.”

Pattern of Behavior

This represents a fresh and shameful point for a president who has made no attempt to hide of his disdain for the facts – or for the media. He has smeared journalists (he called ABC news, whose journalist asked the inquiry about Khashoggi at the Saudi press conference “false information”), berated them in open settings (he called one a “piggy” this week for asking about his relationship with the disgraced financier the convicted criminal), sued news outlets for eye-watering sums of money in vexatious law suits, and called for news outlets he disapproves of to lose their licenses.

He has forced established media out of the official briefing group for refusing to use language of his choosing, and he has gutted financial support for essential public media at domestically and crucial free press internationally.

Broader Implications

All of that has fostered an atmosphere in which journalists are clearly more vulnerable in the United States, but one in which their targeting – and indeed killing – becomes not just unimportant (“things happen”) but acceptable (“many individuals didn’t like that gentleman”).

It is unsurprising that 2024 was the deadliest year on record for the press in the more than 30 years the press freedom organization has been tracking this information: a ongoing neglect to bring to justice those responsible for journalist killings has established a culture of impunity in which journalists’ killers are literally able to escape punishment and so persist in these actions.

In no place is this clearer than in Israel, which is responsible for the killing of over two hundred media workers in the past two years.

Effect on Society

The effect on society is profound. Attacks on journalists are attacks on the truth. They are attacks on facts. They are attacks on our rights to know and on our freedom to live freely and securely.

This week, CPJ gathers for its yearly International Press Freedom awards. The statement there is the same as my one for the president: such events may happen. But it is our responsibility to make sure they do not.