🔗 Share this article

“Things happen.” Just two words. That’s all it took for Donald Trump 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 contempt for the press, for the media – and for the facts.

Background Details

The US president’s dismissal of the murder of prominent journalist the Washington Post columnist came during a press conference with the Saudi crown prince, Mohammed bin Salman – a man whom the US intelligence found in a 2021 report had ordered the abduction and murder of the journalist in 2018. (The crown prince has rejected accusations.)

The US intelligence services were not the only ones to determine the homicide – which took place in the Saudi consulate in Istanbul and in which the late journalist was drugged and dismembered – was signed off at the highest levels. An investigation led by then UN special rapporteur, Agnès Callamard, reached comparable findings.

Global Reactions

For a brief period, nations were in agreement in their condemnation of Saudi Arabia’s actions. The US imposed sanctions and travel restrictions in that year over the killing, although it refrained of penalizing Prince Mohammed himself. Since then, the kingdom has been slowly rehabilitating itself – and the leader’s trip to the US capital seemed to be the final confirmation of that redemption.

White House Remarks

Opponents of the government had roundly condemned the visit. But what was evident at the presidential residence was worse than could have been anticipated. Not only did the president honor Prince Mohammed but he seemed to alter the facts – and then pointed fingers at the victim. The crown prince, he claimed when asked, knew nothing about the murder – in clear opposition to what his nation’s intelligence services determined previously. Moreover, Trump said: “Many individuals didn’t like that person that you’re talking about, whether you approve of him or didn’t like him, things happen.”

Established Conduct

This represents a fresh and shameful point for a leader who has made little secret of his disdain for the truth – or for the press. Trump has smeared journalists (he called a news network, whose reporter asked the inquiry about the journalist at the media event “fake news”), berated them in public (he called one a “rude name” this week for asking about his relationship with the convicted sex offender financier the convicted criminal), taken legal action against media organizations for eye-watering sums of money in vexatious law suits, and called for media groups he disapproves of to lose their licenses.

He has pressured veteran news services out of the official briefing group for refusing to use terminology of his preference, and he has slashed financial support for essential public media at home and crucial free press abroad.

Broader Implications

All of that has fostered an atmosphere in which reporters are clearly more vulnerable in the United States, but one in which their targeting – and indeed killing – becomes not just unimportant (“incidents occur”) but tolerated (“a lot of people disliked that person”).

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 tracking this data: a ongoing neglect to bring to justice those responsible for reporter murders has created a culture of impunity in which those who murder reporters are actually able to get away with murder and so persist in these actions.

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

Societal Impact

The impact on society is profound. Targeting reporters are assaults on facts. They are attacks on facts. They are violations of our entitlement to information and on our liberty to live freely and safely.

On Thursday, CPJ meets for its yearly global journalism honors. The statement there is the identical as my one for Trump: these things may occur. But it is our responsibility to make sure they cease.