This is a sample of The Echidna newsletter sent out each weekday morning. To sign up for FREE, go to theechidna.com.au
$0/
(min cost $0)
Login or signup to continue reading
It was Elton John who said sorry seems to be the hardest word. Now it's simply the cheapest.
What a powerful word it used to be. Carried so much weight, didn't it? A genuine heartfelt apology was an act of humility and contrition that truly meant something.
For many of us a personal apology remains so. We're creatures of passion, too often impulsive, uncaring and self-centred. We hurl harsh words at those we love, leaving wounds only an authentic expression of regret can heal.
But in our modern culture, locked in its perpetual cycle of outrage and apology, publicly saying sorry carries all the conviction of a political promise. It is uttered so frequently by politicians, celebrities and companies it has lost much of its power. Supermarket checkout operators who mumble "Have a nice day" display more sincerity.
Several recent corporate offerings of regret prove why the public apology now matches the diminishing value of the Argentinian peso.
Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of Facebook and one of the most powerful people on the planet, told a US Senate hearing he was sorry for the pain suffered by families whose children suicided after being bullied on social media, particularly by the child molesters that Zuckerberg's algorithms allow to dwell in his fetid online swamps.
Not that anyone truly believes his apology, much less imagines good old Zuck lying in his bed at night, pyjamas soaked in sweat, wracked by all that guilt crushing his tormented soul. Zuckerberg, like most corporate czars who never utter anything in public unless it has been tested by focus groups and honed by public relations experts, uses apologies as a get-out-of-jail-free card.
When he launched Facebook two decades ago, Zuckerberg ridiculed the first 4000 college students who signed up to his fledgling site, happily bragging to friends about the enormous amount of personal data he had collected from so many "dumb f---s [who] trust me".
He was sorry about that, of course. When it was finally made public. Just like that time Facebook handed over the private content of tens of millions of users to a consultancy firm which used the data to build a "psychological warfare tool" that helped Donald Trump win the presidency in 2016.
As Zuckerberg issued his latest robotic apology - the families of many victims unsurprisingly called it "too little and too late" - Australia Post also revealed itself to be the latest in a long line of companies in this country to have suffered "payroll errors".
Predictably, it "unreservedly apologised" to the 3600 employees it had underpaid for a decade by $5.6 million and was "proactively contacting impacted current and former team members to ensure they receive their remediation payment".
A fortnight earlier, the Australian Catholic University admitted it had underpaid staff $3.6 million in wages and offered a "sincere and unequivocal" apology.
Most of us would call such basic mistakes in this era of sophisticated payroll systems as, at best, gross negligence. At worst? Unintended theft. Withholding hard-earned income for years surely had a profound impact on the lives of many of those unwitting victims.
Yet the modern corporate mea culpa - a pile of jargonistic crap so richly laden with excuses you can always see the steam rising from it just before the stench hits you - allows the offender to blithely wash their hands and absolve themselves of responsibility.
It's worked for Toyota exceedingly well. The Japanese car giant apologised (again) two weeks ago for scandals at three of its subsidiary companies, including the falsification of engine emissions data that had been going on for two decades. The company recently edged past Volkswagen AG as the world's leading automaker.
Of course, the meaningless public apology isn't exactly a new phenomenon. Three decades ago the Vatican got down on bended knee to express regret for its condemnation of Galileo, one of history's greatest minds. A papal inquisition in 1633 placed Galileo under house arrest for 10 years for heretically claiming the Earth did not lie at the centre of the universe.
It took until 1992 - 359 years later - for the Pope to say sorry.
There is still a place in this world for authentic public apologies. Many nations, including our own, have said sorry to indigenous people for their past treatment. Other groups like the stolen generations and victims of institutional abuse have also received justified expressions of regret.
But as the puerile outpouring of manufactured corporate apologies continues, that once hardest of words has become not just the cheapest, but also the easiest.
HAVE YOUR SAY: Have you ever offered or received an apology that made a difference? Are you one of those people who find it hard to apologise? Or do you frequently say sorry to others? Do you agree the value of apologising is decreasing? Email us: echidna@theechidna.com.au
SHARE THE LOVE: If you enjoy The Echidna, forward it to a friend so they can sign up, too.
IN CASE YOU MISSED IT:
- Queensland authorities are racing to contain the spread of Australia's newest invasive pest, which poses a threat to river health and water infrastructure. The freshwater gold clam has been found at several sites on the Brisbane River and authorities have issued an alert in a bid to contain it. It's the first confirmed detection of the invader in Australia.
- Despite embarrassing himself in a display of public drunkenness, former deputy prime minister Barnaby Joyce is one of the Nationals' "strongest players on the field", according to Keith Pitt, one of his staunchest allies.
- President Vladimir Putin says Russia would prefer to see US President Joe Biden win a second term, describing him as more experienced than Donald Trump. Speaking with a correspondent of Russian state television, Putin declared that he would work with any US leader who is elected, but noted unequivocally that he would prefer Biden's victory.
THEY SAID IT: "An apology? Bah! Disgusting! Cowardly! Beneath the dignity of any gentleman, however wrong he might be." - Steve Martin
YOU SAID IT: Few things are less appetising than limp lettuce, especially in federal Parliament. Which is why the Opposition has Immigration Minister Andrew Giles up on his feet as often as it can, regardless of Sussan Ley, its own radicchio, in plain sight.
"At least Sussan Ley had a real job before getting sucked into politics," writes Stuart. "She was a flying cattle musterer in the outback."
Debbie writes: "Remember Beatrix Potter was writing about rabbits, namely Peter!"
"Concentrate the beetroot attack on the FIRB and the then treasurer," writes Bill. "They let Heinz buy up Golden Circle and then move it to NZ. The beetroot-growing Lockyer Valley farmers went broke! Sussan Ley, she who once took a Commonwealth ministerial car from Brisbane down to the Goldie to see her new investment unit, is a total waste of space. Dutton sends her out for all the outrageous comments (repeal, repeal, repeal) which might be walked back later, depending on the reaction. The Giles pursuit is tiresome, somehow Dutton is arguing you can ignore the High Court, and that is how Giles mainly replies these days, ignoring the details of the Tehan question. But I have not heard him say as you did that you do the crime, then the time, and you get out. Perhaps to reoffend. That's our system. I wish he would make that point."
Erik writes: "Maybe Giles is not one of those shouters in the Parliament, most of whom are abhorrent and a black mark on civil discourse. But he has done a lot to repair our reputation overseas by changing the inhumane refugee 'policies' that have been in place since the early '90s. Looking at all the errors and mistreatment of innocent and vulnerable people that occurred while we had 'tough' immigration ministers, it's pretty clear that we need someone very different from that. He is getting the blame for what happened in the High Court and the aftermath, but in my view, that's more [Clare] O'Neil's responsibility than his. Sadly, in politics, style matters. You have to yell back. That's not Giles' style."
"You give an interesting take on Andrew Giles' performance these past few days," writes Rick. "I watch question time whenever it is on and I have a completely different view. I think the Opposition is showing its incompetence by asking the same question over and over instead of using QT to ask genuine questions relating to policy matters. Andrew Giles has been quietly and patiently explaining the situation as though to a bunch of pre-schoolers (which the Opposition are showing they are not much more better qualified)."
Bob writes: "Labor weak on immigration? Well, that's a rhetorical question. In 2022-23 there were over half a million immigrants - the highest ever. Giles is simply following in Bowen's footsteps. And in a time of high inflation, high interest rates, a housing crisis, lack of infrastructure, etc. Where do they live, what do they do, and what services are provided, and at what cost? Who is footing the bill for all of that? Why, it's us taxpayers of course."
"Love the lettuce analogy," writes Sue. "I think I find real lettuce more interesting than most Liberal politicians. The top dog may actually be the best of a really uninspiring lot."
Garry Linnell is one of Australia’s most experienced journalists. He has won several awards for his writing, including a Walkley for best feature writing. He writes a weekly column for ACM and the Echidna.
Garry Linnell is one of Australia’s most experienced journalists. He has won several awards for his writing, including a Walkley for best feature writing. He writes a weekly column for ACM and the Echidna.
login
who are we?
contact us
qosheapp
Toi Staff
Gideon Levy
Belen Fernandez
Rami G Khouri
Donald Low
Mort Laitner
Ali Fathollah-Nejad
Nikkei Editorial
Michael Kwet
visit website
