Jamal Khasoggi's death

 

The article I chose is from CNN and it is about the prominent case of the disappearance of the Saudi journalist Jamal Khashoggi. Khashoggi, 59, is a Saudi journalist who was at one point an adviser to some elite officials in Saudi Arabia, but then upon Prince Muhammad bin Salman rise to absolute power in Saudi Arabia, turned against the Saudi government and criticised Prince Muhammad’s tactics and strategies in handling certain issues. He left the country in 2017 and, resided in Virginia where he wrote for the Washington post. Khashoggi was critical of the new Saudi approach to many aspects of the political life in Saudi Arabia. On October 2, he entered the Saudi consulate in Istanbul to obtain some marital papers and since then have disappeared with speculations rising that he was killed by the hands of a Saudi team associated with Prince Muhammad Bin Salman. The article discusses the two versions presented to the international authority from both the Turkish and the Saudi sides.

 

The journalist is so accurate in conveying certain aspects of the story. For instance, he mentions exactly what the allegations, that he was killed, are based on by portraying logical evidence, such as that there happen to be recordings that Khashoggi was killed. The journalist also mentions that there are vivid references to Khashoggi being dismembered in the consulate.

 

The journalist portrays a high level of responsibility towards painting the whole picture to the reader by mentioning that the story contains many inconsistencies which is a sign that provokes doubt. Hence, he gives the reader an insight that the reader should be sceptical about the whole story and not just conform to any information presented to him.

 

The journalist also provides an epitome of journalism independence. He adds information concerning Prince Muhammad bin Salman’s notorious actions which Khashoggi criticised. For instance, he mentions that Prince Muhammad obtained $ 100 billion from Saudi princes and tycoons in “settlements”. Prince Muhammad is a close ally to President Trump and his criticism is not endorsed by Trump’s government, but despite this fact, the journalist did not hold back any information that may seem relevant to the story. Moreover, he sarcastically criticised Prince Muhammad at the end of the article. This also is an example of the freedom of press, as the westerns probably know that Arabs are not so welcoming to sarcasm and are prone to attack him if they sensed any sarcastic tone. However, he mentions at the end that Prince Muhammad should have listened to the advice given to Alice in Wonderland by the duchess.

 

One noticeable violation is the mere bias by story selection based on the unbalance of the presentation of the viewpoints. The journalist provided detailed quotes from the Saudi interior minister and UAE’s minister of state of foreign affairs refuting the allegations that Khashoggi was killed in the consulate and described these allegations as baseless and lies.  He did not quote any Turkish official saying concerning the incident. Moreover, he assigned a larger section of the article to the Saudi perception of the story. On the other hand, he kept it concise when explaining the Turkish side. This was, maybe, meant to oppose Trump’s approach at the time. Trump, then, was pressured by some democratic Senates to deeply investigate the disappearance of Khashoggi. He said that there would be ‘severe punishments’ on Saudi Arabia if the Saudis were involved in the disappearance of Khashoggi. The journalist was not far sighted as he was apparently oblivious that Trump was a close ally to Prince Muhammad bin Salman and that he would soften his tone concerning the incident, if he knew this, he would have probably presented the Turkish side as the dominant side. It is true that he portrayed the freedom of press from one angle but there are many other angles where some invisible hands including the organization’s agenda, the journalist’s aspirations and perceptions, that are mostly subtle, take control of the journalist’s hands when he decides to make use of his only weapon; his pen.