Could an Apology Help Roy Moore’s Senate Campaign?

I usually write about public apologies, but this week I’m thinking about an apology that hasn’t happened: what if Roy Moore offered a public apology for his past transgressions? Could that save his Senate campaign?

Several women have come forward in the last week to accuse Roy Moore of sexual misconduct decades ago. Judge Moore has denied the allegations but many do not believe him, and some Republican senators, including Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, are calling on Moore to withdraw from the campaign.

Could a good apology turn this around? Or, could it have, had he apologized after the first accusation went public last week?

New York Times columnist Ross Douthat speculated in a tweet Monday that it could. He even proposed the outlines of the apology:

“‘Before I was married I was a sinner and a creep. I beg the young woman’s forgiveness. It was decades ago, and I ask you to judge me on the good husband and father and grandfather I’ve become.’ Etc”

I think Moore’s apology would need to go further. He would need to apologize also for his silence about this for decades, that allowed these women to suffer privately. Acknowledging the impact of his sins on their lives would be a sign that he “gets it.” We might also appreciate hearing something like, “I thank God every day for his forgiveness, and ask God every day for the grace to conform my behavior to His will.” If he’s doing anything else to hold himself accountable, it’d be good to mention that too.

He should apologize only if he did it, and if he’s sorry. Even so, an apology now might not salvage his campaign. But it still might be a good thing to do.

 

Michigan Court Orders Mediator to Answer Questions Regarding Mediation

A colleague mediated a litigated case this past summer, that did not result in an agreement. Last week my colleague received a court order in the case, as follows:

It is ordered that the mediator who conducted the parties’ mediation on July __, 2017, shall inform the court as to:

  • Whether opposing counsel was prepared in good faith;
  • whether opposing counsel was late or not;
  • whether opposing counsel submitted a mediation brief;
  • whether the lack of a mediation brief hindered his ability to do his job as mediator;
  • whether either attorney has contacted the mediator after the mediation.

 

Everyone is frustrated when an hours-long mediation fails to result in an agreement. It’s tempting to blame opposing counsel, and sometimes it’s appropriate. If opposing counsel was indeed late, was not prepared in good faith, and failed to submit the required mediation brief, it could have hindered the effectiveness of the mediation, and resulted in a waste of time for all concerned. The judge ought to know, so the offending attorney can be “punished,” right?

But is mediator “tattling” the way to address this?

Having the mediator answer the above questions gets dangerously close to having the mediator reveal confidential communications, which could undermine trust in the mediation process altogether. And mediators who testify even about non-confidential aspects of the mediation risk losing their reputation for neutrality.

It doesn’t seem like anything good can come from a mediator answering these questions for the court.

So how should a mediator respond to an order like this? My colleague plans to tell the court he will not answer the questions, in hopes everyone will drop it and focus on their real issue, the dispute at hand.

A Pretty Good Public Apology

As “the Weinstein effect” continues, a top official at National Public Radio resigned today amid allegations of sexual harassment.

Here’s the apology from NPR senior vice president of news Michael Oreske:

“I am deeply sorry to the people I hurt. My behavior was wrong and inexcusable, and I accept full responsibility.”

One measure of a good apology is whether it meets the “four R’s:” Regret, Responsibility, Restitution, Refrain from the behavior in the future. This apology does a good job of addressing the first two “R’s,” Regret and Responsibility. He doesn’t mention how he plans to make it up to the victims of his harassment (“Restitution”), nor how he plans to avoid such behavior in the future (“Refrain”). But, to his credit, he also avoids saying some of the extraneous things that undermine the sincerity of public apologies.

It’s a good start.

A Good Apology Doesn’t Change the Subject

We learn another element of a good apology from Kevin Spacey this week: don’t change the subject.

Mr. Spacey, a Hollywood actor, was accused this week by another actor, Anthony Rapp, of assaulting him when Rapp was 14. To his credit, Spacey issued an immediate response. He tweeted that he was “beyond horrified” to hear the accusation. He said he did not remember the incident, which would have occurred “over 30 years ago now,” but agreed that, if he “did behave then as he describes, I owe him the sincerest apology for what would have been deeply inappropriate drunken behavior.”

Had Spacey stopped there, we would simply be examining another public apology: not fully taking responsibility (“if I did…” — never say “if”!)  but not fully shirking it either; missing the mark (how about “criminal” instead of “inappropriate”?) but hinting at remorse (“I owe him the sincerest apology”).

But Spacey tweeted a second paragraph, in which he announced that he now wants to live openly as a gay man. He did end the tweet by saying he wants to “examine my own behavior,” but it’s ambiguous as to whether he is referring to his homosexuality or to the assault. There’s an implication that the assault was due to his conflicted feelings about his sexuality.

Spacey has been excoriated on social media for this. Linking homosexuality to sexual assaults on minors feeds the worst stereotypes, and his coming-out announcement deflects attention from the victim, the crime, and the apology.

Regarding the art of apology, the lesson is clear: don’t change the subject. Spacey moved from talking about the offense in the first paragraph to talking about himself in the second. In the process, he undercut whatever good his apology had done. Once you’ve stated your apology, stop. You may want to provide an explanation, but what the offender thinks is an explanation sounds to the victim like an excuse.

In this case, it almost sounds like Spacey was thinking out loud, trying to figure out how he could have possibly done such a monstrous act, and realized both that he has a problem with alcohol and a conflict regarding his sexuality (neither of which explains his assaulting a minor). Best not to work out these inner conflicts in a public apology. Share that with your therapist, and offer the more introspective apology only after you’ve figured it out.

We would’ve preferred something like this: “I’m horrified to admit that I did something so awful, that profoundly harmed another person. I take full responsibility for the assault, and for my silence since. I am very sorry for what I did, and for the devastating impact it has had on this man’s life. I will do whatever I can to make up for this. I am starting by recognizing that I have a problem with alcohol, and I intend to seek help for that immediately. I also plan to apologize personally to this young man who bravely confronted me with my worst self.”

Celebrity Chef John Besh Apologizes

Celebrity Chef John Besh stepped down this week from the restaurant group he founded, amid a host of sexual harassment complaints naming him and other top men in his company, which employs more than one thousand people in New Orleans, San Antonio and Baltimore.

Besh issued a statement in which he acknowledged an extra-marital affair with an employee two years ago. The woman has filed a sexual harassment complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Besh referred to it as a “consensual relationship.”

“Since then I have been seeking to rebuild my marriage and come to terms with my reckless actions given the profound love I have for my wife, my boys and my Catholic faith. I also regret any harm this may have caused to my second family at the restaurant group, and sincerely apologize to anyone past and present who has worked for me who found my behavior as unacceptable as I do,” he said.

“I alone am entirely responsible for my moral failings. This is not the way the head of a company like ours should have acted, let alone a husband and father. But it should not taint our incredible team of more than 1,000 employees, nor undermine our unyielding commitment to treating everyone with respect and dignity, regardless of gender, race, age and sexual preference.”

As an apology, this has some strengths, but overall, it misses the mark.

Here are some strengths:

  • “I regret…”, “I apologize” — These words are essential to apology. Another along these lines would be “sorry.”
  • “I have been seeking to come to terms with my reckless actions” – Taking responsibility
  • “… who found my behavior as unacceptable as I do” – Willing to name his behavior as “unacceptable”
  • “I alone am entirely responsible” – Not trying to foist blame on others, although this is undermined by his reference elsewhere to the affair being “consensual,” since it’s arguable whether a subordinate’s sexual relationship with her boss is ever consensual.
  • “my Catholic faith” – Brave of him to acknowledge his faith given that, although many things divide Catholics, one thing they can all agree on is that marital infidelity is a sin.

Weaknesses:

  • “I regret any harm…” “I apologize to anyone who…” — Like the words “if,” “but” or “maybe,” the word “any” is a red flag in an apology. Saying, “I regret any harm” implies that he has no idea whether his behavior harmed his staff. It’s augmented by use of the word “may”, as if he’s uncertain whether it caused harm or not. He apologizes “to anyone … who found [his] behavior unacceptable,” implying that he suspects not everyone was offended by it. It would be more effective simply to say, “I regret the harm this has caused …”
  • “But” is a red flag in apologies, as Peacemaker Ministries has been warning for years. Usually what follows the “but” is an explanation or an excuse. Here, he seems to be trying to remind his audience of all the good his company has done. But it’s disingenuous; his behavior does “undermine [the company’s] unyielding commitment to treat everyone with respect and dignity.” It turned out that commitment wasn’t so unyielding after all, so it’d be better if his apology didn’t remind people of the lapse.

It sounds like John Besh is on his way towards repentance, and I pray for the sake of him and his family that he gets there. He’s not there yet, but there’s hope.