The death of the public apology has been rather a fascinating development. Since apologies are, almost always, taken to be either disingenuous or just not good enough, for someone who is not remorseful there is absolutely no value in doing it - the crowd will still want blood. Ultimately this means that a public apology is much more likely to be genuine now! You only apologize if you actually, you know, feel sorry.
I guess the ultimate question - is this a better situation than the forced fake apologies? I can't see how. Not that I have any affection for the PR apology, this system where only the remorseful are punished seems substantially worse than a system where unrepentant people can get away with fake remorse.
I suspect there's likely a cyclical nature here. At some point we'll all be used to the denials and attacks, and we will swing back towards apologies being perceived as the unexpected and genuine thing to do.
My concern would be that the most involved parties ultimately benefit. For the 'wants to be angry poster' crowd, this is all great content. And the PR firms that are realistically handling most of the mudslinging largely benefit - there is a lot more value add in fighting a drawn out war on your behalf than writing a one-off apology statement. If PR firms start recommending this strategy, the off-ramp looks a lot more precarious.
The death of the public apology has been rather a fascinating development. Since apologies are, almost always, taken to be either disingenuous or just not good enough, for someone who is not remorseful there is absolutely no value in doing it - the crowd will still want blood. Ultimately this means that a public apology is much more likely to be genuine now! You only apologize if you actually, you know, feel sorry.
I guess the ultimate question - is this a better situation than the forced fake apologies? I can't see how. Not that I have any affection for the PR apology, this system where only the remorseful are punished seems substantially worse than a system where unrepentant people can get away with fake remorse.
I suspect there's likely a cyclical nature here. At some point we'll all be used to the denials and attacks, and we will swing back towards apologies being perceived as the unexpected and genuine thing to do.
My concern would be that the most involved parties ultimately benefit. For the 'wants to be angry poster' crowd, this is all great content. And the PR firms that are realistically handling most of the mudslinging largely benefit - there is a lot more value add in fighting a drawn out war on your behalf than writing a one-off apology statement. If PR firms start recommending this strategy, the off-ramp looks a lot more precarious.