🔗 Share this article

“Stuff occurs.” A mere phrase. That’s all it took for Donald Trump to brush off what is arguably the most notorious 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.

Background Details

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 crown prince, MBS – a man whom the CIA concluded in a recent assessment had ordered the abduction and murder of the Washington Post columnist in that year. (Prince Mohammed has rejected accusations.)

The US intelligence services were not the sole entities to conclude the murder – which occurred in the Saudi consulate in Turkey and in which the 59-year-old journalist was drugged and dismembered – was approved at the top echelons. An investigation led by then UN special rapporteur, the UN investigator, reached comparable findings.

Global Reactions

For a brief period, nations were unified in their criticism of Saudi Arabia’s actions. The United States enacted penalties and visa bans in that year over the murder, although it stopped short of penalizing Prince Mohammed himself. Since then, the nation has been gradually restoring itself – and the leader’s trip to Washington seemed to be the ultimate sign of that redemption.

Presidential Comments

Opponents of the government had strongly criticized the visit. But what was evident at the White House was worse than could have been imagined. Not only did Trump fete the Saudi leader but he seemed to alter the facts – and then pointed fingers at the deceased. Prince Mohammed, he asserted when asked, knew nothing about the murder – in clear opposition to what his nation’s intelligence services determined previously. Moreover, Trump said: “Many individuals disliked that person that you’re talking about, whether you like him or didn’t like him, 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. Trump has defamed reporters (he called ABC news, whose journalist asked the question about the journalist at the media event “false information”), berated them in public (he called one a “piggy” this week for asking about his relationship with the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein), sued news outlets for large amounts of money in vexatious law suits, and called for media groups he doesn’t like to lose their licenses.

He has forced established media out of the official briefing group for declining to use terminology of his preference, and he has slashed financial support for essential public media at domestically and crucial free press internationally.

Broader Implications

All of that has created an environment in which journalists are manifestly less safe in the US, but one in which their targeting – and indeed killing – becomes not just unimportant (“incidents occur”) but tolerated (“a lot of people disliked that gentleman”).

It is no surprise that that year was the most lethal year on file for journalists 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 established a environment without consequences in which those who murder reporters are actually able to get away with murder and so continue to do so.

In no place is this more evident than in the Middle Eastern nation, which is accountable for the deaths of over two hundred media workers in the recent period.

Effect on Society

The effect on society is deep. Attacks on journalists are assaults on facts. They are undermining of reality. They are attacks on our entitlement to information and on our liberty to live freely and safely.

This week, CPJ meets for its yearly International Press Freedom awards. The statement there is the same as my one for Trump: these things may occur. But it is our responsibility to make sure they cease.