🔗 Share this article

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

The Context

The American leader’s dismissal of the killing of prominent journalist the Washington Post columnist came during a press conference with the Saudi leader, Mohammed bin Salman – a man whom the CIA concluded in a 2021 report had orchestrated the kidnap and killing of the journalist in 2018. (Prince Mohammed has rejected accusations.)

The American spy agencies were not the sole entities to conclude the murder – which took place in the Saudi consulate in Turkey and in which the late journalist 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 short time, nations were in agreement in their criticism of Saudi Arabia’s actions. The US enacted penalties and visa bans in 2021 over the killing, although it refrained of sanctioning the crown prince himself. Since then, the nation has been slowly rehabilitating itself – and the leader’s trip to the US capital seemed to be the ultimate sign of that rehabilitation.

White House Remarks

Critics of the government had strongly criticized the meeting. But what was on display at the White House was worse than could have been imagined. Not only did the president fete Prince Mohammed but he effectively rewrote the facts – and then pointed fingers at the victim. Prince Mohammed, Trump claimed when asked, was unaware about the killing – in clear opposition to what his nation’s spy agencies determined four years ago. Moreover, Trump said: “Many individuals didn’t like that person that you’re talking about, whether you like him or disapproved, incidents occur.”

Established Conduct

This marks a new and abject point for a leader who has made no attempt to hide of his contempt for the facts – or for the press. He has defamed journalists (he called a news network, whose reporter asked the inquiry about the journalist at the Saudi press conference “false information”), berated them in public (he called one a “piggy” this week for asking about his relationship with the convicted sex offender financier the convicted criminal), taken legal action against news outlets for large amounts of money in frivolous cases, and called for media groups he disapproves of to be shut down.

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

Broader Implications

All of that has created an atmosphere in which reporters are clearly more vulnerable in the US, but one in which their victimization – and indeed killing – becomes not just unimportant (“incidents occur”) but tolerated (“a lot of people didn’t like that gentleman”).

It is no surprise that that year was the most lethal year on record for the press in the over three decades the press freedom organization has been tracking this information: a ongoing neglect to hold those accountable for journalist killings has created a culture of impunity in which those who murder reporters are literally able to escape punishment and so continue to do so.

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

Societal Impact

The effect on society is deep. Attacks on journalists are assaults on facts. They are attacks on facts. They are attacks on our rights to know and on our freedom to live freely and safely.

On Thursday, CPJ meets for its yearly global journalism honors. My message at the event is the identical as my message for the president: these things may happen. But it is our responsibility to make sure they do not.