Why Saying “I'm Sorry” Isn't Good Enough: The Ethics of Corporate ...

Ethics Corporate Apologies
speaker does not speak in a hectoring or harsh way. Compassion coupled with sorrowful
humility softens the speaker’s heart, making the voice gentle. An angry or fearful
audience hears a speaker who has perceived the audience’s vulnerable emotion state and
who is seeking to make amends in a gentle way that does not further provoke or harm his
or her listeners. Coupling an apology with a joke cartoon renders it less effective, because
the jocular tone suggests that the speaker is not truly repentant and “does not get it.”
When Dreamhost CEO Josh Jones included a picture of Homer Simpson in his emailed
statement expressing his regret for the firm’s over-billing of its customers, the disturbed
customers were understandably not amused (Jones, 2008). They didn’t feel that being
cheated was in the least bit funny, so Jones’ cartoonish apology struck them as wildly
inappropriate and perhaps a bit cruel.
Formal language is generally better than informal speech or text for conveying empathy
and establishing a common emotional bond with the audience. This point needs to be
emphasized, especially given the rise of social media. Consider the following apology
issued as part of a major marketing campaign presumably approved by the CEO. After
Pepsi released an iPhone app making it easy for men to boast about their sexual
conquests, the firm sent out the following tweet: “Our app tried 2 show the humorous
lengths guys go 2 pick up women. We apologize if it’s in bad taste & appreciate your
feedback. #pepsifail” (Liebelt, 2009). The flippancy of this sloppily crafted text message
and argumentative tone (if our ad was in bad taste) make it hard for the angered audience
to take the expressed regret seriously. The apology gave these individuals no reason to
place trust in the firm or its brand. Hashtagging the apology cheapened it further. xiv It
looked as though Pepsi was using the tweet to generate publicity and to create a
36