The Day of the Lukewarm Apology

I know what you have done; I know that you are neither cold nor hot. How I wish you were either one or the other! But because you are lukewarm, neither hot nor cold, I am going to spit you out of my mouth! (Rev 3:15-16)

The BBC has a report on the Wendy Kinnard affair, as does the JEP:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/jersey/7459001.stm

"Senator withdraws detention order.

Jersey's home affairs minister has withdrawn an order on detaining suspects that have not been charged. It was reported the order would give the police powers to indefinitely detain suspects without charge. Senator Wendy Kinnard said that was not the case, but has withdrawn it anyway after objections by States members. She insisted that the order made on 5 June was a "minor change" to the law on detention and police would not have powers to detain indefinitely. "

The JEP notes that she says:

"I apologise to Members and the public for the concern that has been caused by the misinterpretation of the effect of the order and the way in which it entered the public domain."

In other words, I don't really apologise at all. It is all the fault of the nasty lawyers and policemen who misinterpreted it (and who clearly stated that to the JEP), and whatever nameless individual failed to check it before it was released.

Why can't we ever have an honest apology? I made a mistake, and I realise now that the poor wording made misinterpretation highly probably, and I am sorry I didn't see that. The buck stops here.

But "I made a mistake" or even "I apologise to Members and the public for my mistake..." is not something that local politicians seem able to do easily.

Here is Senator Jim Perchard

I would like to apologise to Deputy Baudains and to the House for making statements which were unintentionally misleading during the debate on the Esplanade Quarter last week. I made those statements in good faith, as I thought the information I had was correct at the time I addressed the Assembly. Since it transpired that this information was out of date and therefore incorrect, I would like to apologise unreservedly.

Now look at what he had said:

"The claims are completely false. They are a reputable company and I urge the states to ignore the slight placed on them by Deputy Baudains. We have at WEB taken these rumours seriously and we have doubled-checked and got PwC to do checks"

It would be nice if he not only apologised for making statements about Harcourt, but also the manner in which he made them, and the slight (to use his own terms) by which he denigrated Deputy Baudains personally.

As G.K. Chesterton once said:

A stiff apology is a second insult. The injured party does not want to be compensated because he has been wronged; he wants to be healed because he has been hurt.

But all the apologising we get nowadays is half-hearted and lukewarm.

It reminds me of a sullen child, caught out by his parents or teachers, mouthing the words while he doesn't really mean them. It is really an excuse dressed up as an apology.

The website
http://www.mannersmith.com/resources/issue.cfm?id=8
has a good deal to say about apologies.

Consider it the next time a politician stands up and says - "I apologise..."

---

http://www.mannersmith.com/resources/issue.cfm?id=8

Fake Apologies

The Boomerang Apology ~ This apology is characterized by twisting words so that the apologizer ends up blaming the apologizee. These apologies sound something like "I am sorry you feel that way." I am not sure where this type of apology originated, but blaming the apologizee only serves to defeat the purpose of why you are apologizing in the first place.

The Apology Excuse ~ This apology is characterized by the apologizer stating a reason to justify the situation. These apologies sound something like "I am sorry, but..." In this scenario, the apologizer uses excuses to justify and rationalize a behavior they knew was wrong when they did it.

The Confusion Excuse ~ This apology is characterized by the apologizer attempting to make the apologizee second guess themselves and the situation. These apologies sound something like "I am sorry, you must have misheard me." With so many of us overloaded with information, we do start to second-guess ourselves, even when we are fairly sure we heard right the first time.

The "Not-It" Excuse ~ This apology is characterized by the apologizer blaming something (or someone) else for the situation. These apologies do not even attempt to use the words "I'm sorry," and sound something like "Well, you know, it is not my fault..." This type of apology is commonly heard when dealing with someone who was supposed to provide goods or services.

True Apologies

In order for an apology to be a true apology it must be sincere and the apologizer must feel at least a small amount of guilt for either the situation or the apologizee's feelings.

For further reading:

Accounts, Excuses, and Apologies: A Theory of Image Restoration Strategies (Suny Sieres in Speech Communication) (Paperback) by William L. Benoit (Author)