🔗 Share this article

“Stuff occurs.” 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 sank to a fresh depth in his disregard toward the press, for the media – and for the facts.

The Context

The US president’s dismissive attitude of the killing of prominent journalist the Washington Post columnist came during a media briefing with the Saudi leader, MBS – a man whom the US intelligence found in a recent assessment had orchestrated the kidnap and killing of the journalist in that year. (The crown prince has rejected accusations.)

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 cut apart – was approved at the top echelons. An investigation led by former UN expert, the UN investigator, reached similar conclusions.

International Response

For a brief period, nations were in agreement in their criticism of the kingdom’s conduct. The United States enacted penalties and travel restrictions in 2021 over the killing, although it stopped short 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 redemption.

Presidential Comments

Critics of the regime had strongly criticized the meeting. But what was on display at the White House was worse than could have been anticipated. Not only did Trump fete the Saudi leader but he seemed to alter the facts – and then blamed the victim. Prince Mohammed, he claimed when asked, knew nothing about the killing – in clear opposition to what his nation’s spy agencies concluded four years ago. Moreover, Trump said: “Many individuals disliked that gentleman that you’re talking about, whether you approve of him or disapproved, things happen.”

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 press. He has smeared journalists (he called a news network, whose journalist asked the question about the journalist at the media event “false information”), berated them in public (he called one a “rude name” this week for asking about his relationship with the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein), taken legal action against news outlets for large amounts of money in frivolous cases, and called for news outlets he disapproves of to be shut down.

He has forced established media out of the White House press pool for refusing to use terminology of his preference, and he has slashed funding for vital news services at domestically and vital independent media internationally.

Wider Consequences

All of that has created an environment in which journalists are manifestly less safe in the United States, but one in which their targeting – and indeed murder – becomes not just insignificant (“things happen”) but tolerated (“many individuals didn’t like that gentleman”).

It is no surprise that that year was the deadliest year on file for journalists in the over three decades the press freedom organization has been documenting this data: a ongoing neglect to bring to justice those accountable for reporter murders has established a culture of impunity in which those who murder reporters are actually able to escape punishment and so persist in these actions.

In no place is this more evident than in Israel, which is accountable for the deaths of over two hundred journalists in the recent period.

Societal Impact

The effect on the public is profound. Targeting reporters are assaults on facts. They are attacks on facts. They are attacks on our entitlement to information and on our liberty to exist without fear and securely.

On Thursday, the Committee to Protect Journalists gathers for its annual global journalism honors. The statement at the event is the identical as my message for Trump: such events may happen. But it is our duty to make sure they cease.