🔗 Share this article

“Stuff occurs.” A mere phrase. That was enough for the US president to effectively dismiss what is arguably the most infamous journalist killing of the past ten years – and in so doing plumbed a new low in his disregard toward journalists, for journalism – and for the facts.

Background Details

The US president’s dismissal of the murder of prominent journalist the Washington Post columnist came during a media briefing with the Saudi crown prince, MBS – a man whom the CIA found in a 2021 report had ordered 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 only ones to determine the homicide – which took place in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul and in which the 59-year-old Khashoggi was sedated and dismembered – was signed off at the top echelons. An investigation led by then UN special rapporteur, the UN investigator, reached similar conclusions.

Global Reactions

For a brief period, nations were in agreement in their condemnation of the kingdom’s conduct. The United States enacted penalties and visa bans in that year over the killing, although it refrained of penalizing the crown prince himself. Since then, the nation has been gradually restoring itself – and the crown prince’s visit to Washington seemed to be the ultimate sign of that rehabilitation.

Presidential Comments

Critics of the regime had strongly criticized the visit. But what was on display at the White House was more alarming than could have been imagined. Not only did Trump honor the Saudi leader but he seemed to alter the facts – and then pointed fingers at the deceased. The crown prince, Trump claimed when asked, was unaware about the murder – in direct contradiction to what his nation’s intelligence services concluded previously. Moreover, the president said: “Many individuals didn’t like that person that you’re talking about, whether you approve of him or disapproved, things happen.”

Established Conduct

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 press. Trump has defamed journalists (he called ABC news, whose reporter asked the inquiry about the journalist at the Saudi press conference “fake news”), scolded them in open settings (he called one a “piggy” this week for asking about his connection with the disgraced financier the convicted criminal), taken legal action against media organizations for large amounts of money in frivolous cases, and called for media groups he doesn’t like to be shut down.

He has forced established media out of the White House press pool for declining to use terminology of his choosing, and he has slashed funding for vital news services at home and crucial free press abroad.

Wider Consequences

All of that has created an atmosphere in which journalists are manifestly less safe in the US, but one in which their targeting – and indeed killing – becomes not just insignificant (“incidents occur”) but tolerated (“a lot of people didn’t like 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 documenting this data: a ongoing neglect to hold those accountable for journalist killings has created a environment without consequences in which journalists’ killers are literally able to escape punishment and so continue to do so.

Nowhere is this more evident than in the Middle Eastern nation, which is accountable for the deaths of over two hundred media workers in the past two years.

Societal Impact

The effect on society is profound. Attacks on journalists are assaults on facts. They are undermining of reality. They are attacks on our rights to know and on our freedom to live freely and securely.

This week, CPJ gathers for its annual global journalism honors. The statement there is the identical as my one for Trump: such events may occur. But it is our duty to make sure they do not.