🔗 Share this article

“Things happen.” A mere phrase. That was enough for the US president to brush off 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 the media – and for the facts.

The Context

The US president’s dismissive attitude of the killing of well-known reporter the Washington Post columnist came during a media briefing with the Saudi leader, MBS – a man whom the CIA found in a 2021 report had orchestrated the abduction and murder of the Washington Post columnist in that year. (Prince Mohammed has denied involvement.)

The American spy agencies were not the sole entities to conclude the murder – which took place in the Saudi diplomatic building in Istanbul and in which the late journalist was sedated and dismembered – was signed off at the highest levels. An inquiry led by former UN expert, the UN investigator, reached similar conclusions.

Global Reactions

For a brief period, nations were in agreement in their criticism of the kingdom’s conduct. The US enacted penalties and travel restrictions in 2021 over the killing, although it refrained of sanctioning the crown prince himself. Since then, the kingdom has been slowly rehabilitating itself – and the crown prince’s visit to the US capital seemed to be the ultimate sign of that rehabilitation.

Presidential Comments

Critics of the regime had strongly criticized the visit. But what was evident at the presidential residence was more alarming than could have been anticipated. Not only did the president honor the Saudi leader but he seemed to alter the facts – and then blamed the victim. Prince Mohammed, he asserted when asked, was unaware about the killing – in direct contradiction to what his country’s own 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 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 question about the journalist at the Saudi press conference “false information”), berated them in open settings (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 vexatious law suits, and called for news outlets he disapproves of to lose their licenses.

He has forced veteran news services out of the official briefing group for refusing to use language of his choosing, and he has gutted funding for essential public media at domestically and vital independent media abroad.

Broader Implications

All of that has fostered an environment in which journalists are clearly more vulnerable in the US, but one in which their victimization – and indeed killing – becomes not just insignificant (“things happen”) but acceptable (“a lot of people disliked that gentleman”).

It is no surprise that that year was the deadliest year on file for the press in the over three decades the press freedom organization has been tracking this data: a ongoing neglect to bring to justice those accountable for journalist killings has established a environment without consequences in which journalists’ killers are actually able to escape punishment and so continue to do so.

Nowhere is this clearer than in the Middle Eastern nation, which is responsible for the killing of more than 200 media workers in the recent period.

Societal Impact

The impact on the public is profound. Attacks on journalists are attacks on the truth. They are attacks on facts. They are violations of our entitlement to information and on our freedom to live freely and safely.

On Thursday, 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.