🔗 Share this article

“Incidents take place.” A mere phrase. That’s all it took for the US president to effectively dismiss what is probably the most notorious murder of a reporter 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.

Background Details

The US president’s dismissive attitude of the murder of prominent journalist the Washington Post columnist came during a media briefing with the Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman – a man whom the CIA concluded in a 2021 report had ordered the kidnap and killing of the Washington Post columnist 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 consulate in Istanbul and in which the late journalist was sedated and dismembered – was approved at the highest levels. An inquiry led by then UN special rapporteur, the UN investigator, reached comparable findings.

Global Reactions

For a short time, nations were unified 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 kingdom has been slowly rehabilitating itself – and the crown prince’s visit to the US capital seemed to be the final confirmation of that redemption.

Presidential Comments

Critics of the regime had strongly criticized the meeting. 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 deceased. The crown prince, he asserted when asked, knew nothing about the murder – in direct contradiction to what his nation’s spy agencies concluded four years ago. Moreover, Trump said: “Many individuals didn’t like that person that you’re talking about, whether you like him or disapproved, things happen.”

Pattern of Behavior

This marks a new and abject point for a leader who has made little secret of his contempt for the facts – or for the press. He has smeared journalists (he called a news network, whose journalist asked the question 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 connection with the disgraced financier the convicted criminal), sued 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 veteran news services out of the White House press pool for refusing to use terminology of his choosing, and he has slashed funding for essential public media at home and crucial free press abroad.

Broader Implications

All of that has fostered an environment in which journalists are manifestly less safe in the United States, but one in which their victimization – and indeed murder – becomes not just insignificant (“incidents occur”) but acceptable (“many individuals disliked that gentleman”).

It is unsurprising that 2024 was the deadliest year on record for the press in the over three decades the press freedom organization has been documenting this data: 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 persist in these actions.

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

Societal Impact

The effect on society is deep. Attacks on journalists are attacks on the truth. They are attacks on facts. They are violations of our rights to know and on our liberty to live freely and safely.

On Thursday, CPJ meets for its annual International Press Freedom awards. My message at the event is the identical as my one for the president: such events may happen. But it is our responsibility to make sure they do not.