Genuine Apology or Sorry Excuse?

Los Angeles City Councilman Mike Hernandez, arrested for possession of cocaine, publicly apologizes and seeks forgiveness from “those who I have harmed.” The Internal Revenue Service issues a public apology for serious errors that resulted in the prolonged hounding of taxpayers. Ellie Nesler apologizes “from the bottom of my heart” to a crowded courtroom for killing the man who allegedly molested her son. Immigration and Naturalization Service officials offer their regrets to a man they wrongfully arrested.

Used to be when a public figure was caught in flagrante delicto the ethic was “never apologize, never explain”--words taken from John Wayne in “She Wore a Yellow Ribbon,” a movie from 1949. No more. “I’m sorry” has become the intonation in public discourse. Public expressions of contrition are part of the social dance of reconciliation and redemption.

Why do we want our public officials to apologize when we were happy to turn a blind eye? Are all apologies equal? Why do we buy some and not others? How long does it take for a reputation to be rejuvenated after a public betrayal? Has the ritual of contrition become a facile political ploy that has lost its currency?

“The public ethic has shifted away from the stiff upper lip to the flawed person,” says Deborah Tannen, a linguist at Georgetown University and author of “You Just Don’t Understand: Women and Men in Conversation” (William Morrow, 1990). “We want our public officials not to be apart from us, but to be one of us. . . . TV brought them into our living rooms.”

A sincere public apology can begin to restore the equilibrium between a public official and the people: Power is handed back to the public when its forgiveness is beseeched. It is an acknowledgment that an offense was committed, that society’s rules are valid and that displays of shame and repentance are required.

Yet, because the offender isn’t really relinquishing anything, an apology can actually end up making him more powerful. “It shores up the reputations of the powerful by inoculating them with a dose of vulnerability and humility,” says Regina Barecca, a professor at the University of Connecticut at Storrs. “They are saying ‘I am big enough to admit I did this.’ ”

In any case, an apology is considered “one of the most profound interactions of a civilized people,” says University of Massachusetts Chancellor Aaron Lazare, a psychiatrist who is writing a book on the subject. “Apology is a normal human healing process. . . . Without it you would have all these fractured, broken relationships.”

*

A genuine apology, says Lazare, has four critical elements: acknowledgment of the offense, a believable explanation of why it occurred (don’t confuse this with excuses), genuine expression of shame or rue, and reparation. The use of a passive voice or too many “ifs” or “may haves” is a death knell.

Consider some of the worst public apologies of all time, those issued by former Sen. Bob Packwood (R-Ore.) and Richard M. Nixon. In response to accusations of sexual harassment, Packwood said: “I’m apologizing for the conduct that it was alleged that I did.”

And Nixon gave this pseudo-apology when he resigned the presidency in 1974: “I regret deeply any injuries that may have been done in the course of events that led to this decision. I would say only that if some of my judgments were wrong, and some were wrong, they were made in what I believed at the time were the best interest of the Nation.”

“To acknowledge it, they would have to say ‘for the damage that I did and the harm that I caused,’ not ‘just in case I hurt you or may have hurt you,’ ” says Lazare. “Watergate would have been a dead issue if Nixon had acknowledged and apologized for it. Nixon and Packwood further offend by avoiding responsibility.”

Furthermore, the extent of an apology can have everything to do with whether it works. When INS officials mistakenly arrested activist Art Pulido last month, a public apology was issued but failed to detail the offensive use of handcuffs even after the officials realized they had a case of mistaken identity. Pulido demanded that the officials also apologize for the cuffs.

“For an apology to be genuine, it must acknowledge exactly in detail what was done,” says Lazare. “Oversimplifying it avoids responsibility.”

*

Redemption doesn’t come easily for the fallen few who blow their “I’m sorry.” Nixon received a hero’s burial only after he dropped from sight, decades passed and his image was partially repaired by his continued contributions to foreign policy.

Packwood isn’t likely to resurrect his political career any time soon. And the jury is still out on whether Hernandez will win back constituents who reportedly feel betrayed by his cocaine use, which Hernandez called “the illness of chemical dependency.” Lazare said the councilman’s apology (“I apologize for the pain and embarrassment these side effects may have caused”) was “squirmy.

“He is not [saying he’s] sorry for his behavior. He is embarrassed and sorry for the effects of his ‘illness,’ ” says Lazare. “He is disowning responsibility for his behavior by medicalizing it. Whether or not it is a disease is a medical as well as a philosophical debate.”

A genuine apology must be twinned with true intent to (or--even better--demonstrations of) change before public trust can be restored, says Lazare. Among the best apologies, he said, is that of former South African President F.W. de Klerk, who enumerated the injustices of apartheid and said if he “could turn the clock back” to avoid them, he would.

“He could have been killed for that apology,” says Lazare. “And it led to the dismantlement of apartheid.” Better late than never.

Also on the right track was the United States’ apology to Japanese Americans for their internment during World War II--because it was accompanied by reparations. Nothing invalidates an apology like the failure to offer reparations when the need for them is obvious.

Also, Lazare says, “People will wait to see if, in your repentance, you have become a different person.” Henry II atoned for his role in the murder of the archbishop of Canterbury by walking barefoot and bleeding to Becket’s tomb, where he was greeted with a good flogging.

Our consumption of public figures’ personal flaws and foibles shows no signs of abating. The question is: Will public apologies devalue?

“The public apology is not completely bankrupt,” answers Barecca. “Here we had Clinton who confessed that he had problems with his marriage, and the political machinery thought they could break him with it, but it didn’t. But with the Paula Jones accusations, you have Clinton unwilling to apologize. This shows [an apology] still has some currency.”

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

The Good

* Pope John Paul II’s apology in 1995 for the Roman Catholic church’s treatment of women:

“Women’s dignity has often been unacknowledged and their prerogatives misrepresented; they have often been relegated to the margins of society and even reduced to servitude. This has prevented women from truly being themselves and it has resulted in a spiritual impoverishment of humanity. . . . And if objective blame . . . has belonged to not just a few members of the church, for this I am sorry.”

* South African President F.W. de Klerk’s apology in 1993 for his National Party’s imposition of apartheid:

“It was not our intention to deprive people of their rights and to cause misery, but eventually apartheid led to just that. Insofar as that occurred, we deeply regret it. Deep regret goes much further than just saying you are sorry, . . . [it] says that if I could turn the clock back, and if I could do anything about it, I would have liked to have avoided it.”

* Michael Jackson’s apology in 1995 for anti-Semitic lyrics on his “HIStory” album:

“I acknowledge that I seriously offended some people, which was never my intention. . . . I have come to understand over the past few days that these words are considered anti-Semitic. . . . I sincerely hope that anyone offended by my words will forgive me.”

The Mealy-Mouthed

* U.S. Sen. Alfonse D’Amato’s (R-N.Y.) apology in 1995 for mocking O.J. Simpson trial Judge Lance Ito with a fake Japanese accent:

“If I offended anyone, I’m sorry.”

* President Ronald Reagan’s apology in 1987 for the Iran-Contra affair:

“Serious mistakes were made.”

* U.S. House Majority Leader Dick Armey’s (R-Texas) apology in 1995 for referring to fellow congressman Barney Frank (D.-Mass.) as “Barney Fag”:

“This was nothing more than an unintentional mispronunciation of another person’s name that sounded like something it was not.”

* U.S. Sen. Jesse Helms’ (D-N.C.) apology in 1995 for suggesting that President Clinton would need a bodyguard while visiting military bases:

“In an informal interview with a local reporter, I made an offhand remark. . . . Of course, I did not expect to be taken literally.”