In this age of global real-time communication, the public apology has become almost as routine as the daily weather report. No longer is it possible to catch a comment or an act when it’s still in the smaller stages of impact and do damage control before stuff really hits the fan. That great big fan is now running 24/7, so there’s no stopping anything once it’s been said or done.
We’ve all heard the apologies, from the politician confessing marital infidelity and typically accompanied by his stand-by-your-man wife who’d probably rather stab him at that moment than show her face to the world in front of TV cameras, to the Olympic athlete who “over-exaggerated” a story about a night of drunken reveling in Rio. And the questions are always the same: How sincere is this apology? Is it a real admission of guilt or just a “Damn, I got caught”? Accepting an apology is often even more difficult than making one, and the greater the number of hearers the greater the possibility for disagreeing on the sincerity or lack thereof.
What are the criteria for a sincere apology? Everyone has gotten the old non-apology a few times: “If I’ve offended you in any way, I’m sorry.” The speaker makes no admission of wrongdoing and therefore cannot be genuinely sorry. What this line really means is “You’re mad at me. I don’t think I did anything wrong, but I need to make you stop being mad, so I’m going to say some words to try to smooth things over.” The red flag here is the word “if”; I can’t possibly feel “sorrow” for something I don’t even know I did. According to Dr. Robert Gordon in his TED Talk The Power of the Apology, “Most people apologize to get something rather than to give something.” I couldn’t agree more.
Jeffrey Bernstein summarizes Dr. Gordon’s talk in a Psychology Today post entitled “The Three Parts of a Meaningful, Heartfelt Apology,” dated December 3, 2014. These are the three parts:
1) Acknowledgement – Being able to see how your actions impact others is key to making a sincere apology. The acknowledgement part of the apology needs to start with “I.” For example, “I am sorry for being late tonight.”
2) Remorse and Empathy – Remorse is truly feeling bad for what you’ve done. Empathy is about being able to put yourself in the other person’s shoes and know how she or he feels.
3) Restitution – This means taking action to provide an act or service to make up for the transgression.
Start with acknowledgement. One has to be sorry for something. When a child is instructed to apologize to a sibling or playmate, the child often mumbles “Sorry” while facing the opposite direction and walking away from the offended party. Anyone can see the insincerity in this situation, but is the adult who says “IF I’ve offended you, I’m sorry” any more sincere than the child? Any apology must begin with an honest mea culpa. If I’m not willing to make a humble acknowledgment of what I’ve done, there’s no way I can be feeling any sorrow for my action.
Remorse is deep regret, and empathy is putting oneself in the other’s place. It means admitting how I would feel if the situation were reversed. It means feeling the heartache I’ve imposed on another person. When I can do those things, I’m ready to say “I’m sorry” and mean it.
And finally, restitution means being willing to do something to make the offended person feel better, whether it’s sending flowers after an argument or simply making sure the offensive behavior is not repeated.
I believe it’s also important to distinguish between “I’m sorry” and “I regret.” Expressing regret does not usually qualify as an apology, because it doesn’t acknowledge wrongdoing. It is possible to honestly deeply regret a situation without feeling any personal responsibility for it. For example,
- “I regret having to break my promise to take you to the beach because we’re under hurricane watch.”
- “I regret that you didn’t tell me you were married before I decided to date you.”
- “I regret having to decline the invitation to your dinner party.”
None of these examples involve guilt on the part of the speaker, but the speaker may genuinely feel bad about the situation.
With these guidelines in mind, let’s look at how two public apologies from the last week measure up: Donald Trump’s statement of regret about things he has said in campaign speeches and Ryan Lochte’s public statement regarding his escapades in Rio.
In Trump’s latest effort to turn around his failing “campaign,” he offered this admission in a speech on August 18:
Sometimes, in the heat of debate and speaking on a multitude of issues, you don’t choose the right words or you say the wrong thing. I have done that. And believe it or not, I regret it. And I do regret it, particularly where it may have caused personal pain. Too much is at stake for us to be consumed with these issues.
Is this a real apology? I would say “No.” And I would add “Hell, no!”
What’s missing here? Pretty much everything. First of all, it clearly sounds like what Dr. Gordon described as apologizing “to get something rather than to give something.” His campaign is failing and his poll numbers are sliding, so he clearly needs to get more support. Then why not try a new approach, something he had never done before? Why not admit that he has said some wrong things? Doing so might sway some voters in his direction. He was not giving anything, because he didn’t even state to whom he was “apologizing.”
Where is his acknowledgment of wrongdoing? He does say he has sometimes chosen the wrong words and said the wrong things, but he doesn’t acknowledge any statement in particular; and we all know the list he could have chosen from would fill a book. This is very much like the toddler’s apology: “Sor-ry!” Trump also begins the “apology” with an excuse: he was “in the heat of debate and speaking on a multitude of issues.” He’s already implied even before his confession that he was only being human, that these things happen. And of course they do happen, but an apology must start with taking responsibility for one’s own behavior, regardless of the circumstances.
Body language counts, too. When I saw the video of these remarks, I noticed that he pauses after “I have done that,” with a facial expression that suggests this may come as a surprise to anyone who’s not been living under a rock for the last year. He seems to be expecting affirmation that he really is a good little boy and that what he said was not that bad.
Why does he preface his expression of regret with “And believe it or not”? Why would anyone have believed up to this point that he had any regrets, since he had never said he regretted anything, never retracted a statement no matter how outrageous, and never apologized for anything? He is even on record as saying he’s never asked God to forgive him for anything, even though he claims to be a Christian.
He “regrets” unspecified wrong words about unspecified people, then adds, “particularly where it may have caused personal pain.” May have caused? He knows the pain he’s caused, or at least he’s been told. Unspecified words about unspecified people which have done unspecified damage do not suggest remorse or empathy. This is a classic non-apology: If I’ve offended anyone, I’m sorry. How about looking into the camera and saying “Mr. and Mrs. Khan, I am so sorry for the pain my words have caused you. Your son was a hero. Please forgive me”; or “Senator McCain, Thank you for your service and sacrifice. Please forgive me for my cruel words.” He could have directly addressed any of the other dozens of people he has callously attacked.
As for restitution, so far there’s been none. At last reporting, he has made no phone calls or any attempt to reach out and make amends to any of the people he has offended. And although he attributes his “wrong words” to “the heat of debate,” that excuse doesn’t hold up because he has never made his insulting remarks only one time. When confronted with any specific attack, his standard response has been to double down and reinforce the original words when he is no longer in the heat of a moment. And since he has made no effort at restitution after his speech, I think listeners are justified in doubting his sincerity.
Now how does Mr. Lochte’s public statement hold up to scrutiny? Here’s what he said:
I want to apologize for my behavior last weekend — for not being more careful and candid in how I described the events of that early morning and for my role in taking the focus away from the many athletes fulfilling their dreams of participating in the Olympics. I waited to share these thoughts until it was confirmed that the legal situation was addressed and it was clear that my teammates would be arriving home safely.
It’s traumatic to be out late with your friends in a foreign country — with a language barrier — and have a stranger point a gun at you and demand money to let you leave, but regardless of the behavior of anyone else that night, I should have been much more responsible in how I handled myself and for that am sorry to my teammates, my fans, my fellow competitors, my sponsors, and the hosts of this great event. I am very proud to represent my country in Olympic competition and this was a situation that could and should have been avoided. I accept responsibility for my role in this happening and have learned some valuable lessons.
I think this one measures up to the criteria a little better than Trump’s does. He does acknowledge a specific wrong: “not being more careful and candid in how I described the events.” I’d feel better if he’d said “I’m sorry for lying about the events,” since I’m not a big fan of euphemism; but this is at least a somewhat specific acknowledgment. He also expresses some remorse and empathy by naming specific people who were hurt by his actions and how they were hurt. He seems to have some understanding of how it would feel to be in their place. It remains to be seen whether he will make any form of restitution, and that decision will probably be dictated at least in part by the authorities. If, however, he has in fact “learned some valuable lessons,” we should be able to expect better behavior from him in the future.
On the other hand, he implies that he’s sticking to his original story when he offers the excuse about the stranger pointing a gun at him and demanding money from him. Like Trump’s excuse that he spoke “in the heat of debate,” this excuse weakens the apology by implying that his actions were the result of circumstances beyond his control.
Although Lochte acknowledges his wrong words, he says nothing of his wrong actions. He never mentions the acts of vandalism or public drunkenness, without which he’d have had no reason to lie about his evening and there would have been no story. His apology is better, I think, but still incomplete.
Saying “I’m sorry” is hard, especially when it has to be said in front of the whole world. We all want to excuse our behavior, even when it’s wrong. “Humble pie” tastes terrible. It’s also sometimes hard to accept an apology: the hurt is too deep, I’m not quite finished being mad at you yet, you’ve given me no reason to believe you’re going to change, or I’ve heard this song before.
Public apologies will continue as long as there are politicians and TV/radio personalities. We’ve heard them before, and we’ll hear them again; but sometimes the apology comes too late, and sometimes it’s just desperate words and not an apology at all. Sometimes “sorry” isn’t enough to make up for the damage done. We’re the court of public opinion, and we’ll decide which ones we believe and which ones we don’t. Meanwhile, maybe we can all hum along with Elton John:
It’s sad, so sad, it’s a sad, sad situation
And it’s getting more and more absurd
It’s so sad so sad, why can’t we talk it over?
Oh, it seems to me
That sorry seems to be the hardest word.