From “My Bad” to “I'm Sorry": Trump's Evolving Apology

Donald Trump has formally apologized. Both in video, and in person on the debate stage Sunday night. Yet in the eyes of many, he stands unforgiven. A man forever condemned by his past. Is that fair? Even some of his supporters are not satisfied with his apology. They want more remorse. A stronger and more pronounced act of contrition. They want, in the argument of some who have analyzed him through the years, something the public has never seen. Realistic? Voters have less than one month to decide.

Is Trump´s 2005 behavior on the bus in the now infamous Access Hollywood video the unforgivable sin? That is the question that voters (including Trump supporters) are grappling with. Many people, some of whom have themselves misbehaved in years past, are drawing distinctions and recognizing different levels of culpability that should govern how quickly one can rebound from bombshell revelations, as we experienced last Friday.

Others are wondering, particularly in light of allegations that continue to surface surrounding Mr. Trump and the time period in question, whether voters have arrived at a place where they are unwilling and perhaps unable to forgive.

The Court of Public Opinion

As a career prosecutor, I hear apologies in a court of law all of the time, and am familiar with circumstances that determine their authenticity. Was the transgression an isolated incident? How long has it been? Is there evidence that the person has changed? In a court of law, a judge decides the weight to be given to an apology in light of all of these factors, and more.

In the court of public opinion, however, a mea culpa is accepted very differently. Unlike a court of law, which mandates some type of penance or punishment for the underlying transgression, the court of public opinion is surprisingly willing to forgive, often without severe consequences. As long as the apology is viewed as sincere, research indicates that people are surprisingly willing to forgive . . . sometimes forgive even horrendous behavior.

Yet many voters are having a difficult time forgiving Donald Trump. Research about the art of public apology helps explain this phenomenon.

The Political Apology That Wasn´t—or Was It?

Trump is not the only politician to be caught on a hot mic. Yet content counts. In Trump´s case, the dreadful statements in question were uttered well before he was running for office—yet nonetheless cast doubt on his fitness for office in the minds of supporters and detractors alike. Hence, the need for an apology at the very least. But what kind of apology is necessary under the circumstances? Are there magic words that can quell the firestorm? Or are words alone insufficient?

Some political apologies go down smoother than others. An example of the latter, relayed in a scholarly article on “political non-apologies,” includes an apology by a Congressman for “any harm or hurt” he might have caused, or for a “misconstrued construction” of what he said.[1] If the expression of remorse is hard to understand, it is hard to accept.

If you are running for public office, why apologize in the first place? Do voters expect personal acts of contrition from public leaders? Apologies maintain social bonds and enhance public trust of public officials. [2] Insincere, contrived, or otherwise inauthentic apologies undermine trust building and maintenance between elected officials and their constituents.[3] Yet the burning question Trump and his team no doubt agonized over for numerous hours last Friday leading up to the release of the taped mea culpa, was how to do it.

The Art of Apology

Scholars have recognized several components of an apology. These include recognition and remorse, as well as a willingness to perform penance to remedy the harm.[4] Another definition includes both embracing the wrongful conduct and expressing regret.[5] There is a premium placed on ensuring the offensive behavior will not re-occur. [6]

Apologies that adopt a tone of narcissism, avoidance of blame, or proclaimed victimization reduces the perception of remorse or responsibility. [7] These are some of the areas where Trump´s apology has been publicly dissected and found to be insufficient by detractors and supporters alike.

Researchers also note the obvious difference between “I´m sorry” versus the very different message relayed by “I´m sorry you were offended.” [8] Apologies are also found wanting when they provide an incomplete or vague acknowledgment of the underlying offense.[9] There may, however, be a much simpler reason some voters are unwilling or unable to forgive Donald Trump. They want to hear that he is sorry, and see that he is sorry.

The Mannerisms Must Match the Message

It has been observed that Trump delivered his videotaped apology on Friday night with his “brow furrowed” and a “tight scowl.”[10] Others note that such contortion represents Trump´s trademark facial expression. For this message, however, many voters wanted to see more.

Another observer noted that Trump´s face showed little change during the course of his videotaped apology, describing it as a “living mask.”[11] Those who have followed his career for years might argue this mask is his normal appearance regardless of what he is saying. Yet that might be precisely the point here—what was lacking was a different expression, one consistent with remorse and contrition, even shame. [12]

Trump´s message is also subject to analysis regarding the content, including both what it contained, as well as what it didn´t.

High Profile Pubic Apologies

Research analyzing the effectiveness of 183 public apologies between the years of 2000 and 2012 described apologies as persuasive messages, and discovered a link between characteristics of apologies and cultural scripts of atonement.[13] This link caused some apologies to be better accepted than others.[14]

Public apologies by celebrity figures are easily analyzed for both tone and content because they are often delivered via press release, media interviews, or social media posts. [15] They are themselves aptly recognized as “media events.” [16]

Trump´s videotaped public apology, analyzed in the face of such research, might be considered inadequate by some due to the sequencing of the words he used, and those he didn´t. [17] They are examining whether he created a story line that emphasized regret for past behavior, put forth an explanation for the behavior itself, and assured the public that such transgressions would not be repeated.[18]

With less than one month until the election, voters have to decide whether the conduct at issue should be chalked up to a case of live and learn, as well as make the personal decision about whether to forgive and forget.

[1] Robert M. Eisinger, ”The Political Non-Apology,” Social Science and Public Policy Vol. 48 (2011): 136-141 (136).

[2] Eisinger, ”The Political Non-Apology,” 136.

[3] Eisinger, ”The Political Non-Apology,” 136.

[4] Eisinger, ”The Political Non-Apology,” 136.

[5] Eisinger, ”The Political Non-Apology,” 136.

[6] Eisinger, ”The Political Non-Apology,” 136.

[7] Eisinger, ”The Political Non-Apology,” 136.

[8] Eisinger, ”The Political Non-Apology,” 137.

[9] Eisinger, ”The Political Non-Apology,” 137.

[10] http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/08/us/politics/donald-trump-apology.html…

[11] http://www.bodylanguagesuccess.com/2016/10/nonverbal-communication-anal…

[12] http://www.bodylanguagesuccess.com/2016/10/nonverbal-communication-anal…

[13] Karen A. Cerulo and Janet M. Ruane, ”Apologies of the Rich ad Famous: Cultural, Cognitive, and Social Explanations of Why We Care and Why We Forgive,” Social Psychology Quarterly Vol. 77, No. 2 (2014): 123-149.

[14] Ibid.

[15] Cerulo and Ruane, ”Apologies of the Rich ad Famous: Cultural, Cognitive, and Social Explanations of Why We Care and Why We Forgive,” 125.

[16] Cerulo and Ruane, ”Apologies of the Rich ad Famous: Cultural, Cognitive, and Social Explanations of Why We Care and Why We Forgive,” 125.

[17] Cerulo and Ruane, ”Apologies of the Rich ad Famous: Cultural, Cognitive, and Social Explanations of Why We Care and Why We Forgive,” 126.

[18] Cerulo and Ruane, ”Apologies of the Rich ad Famous: Cultural, Cognitive, and Social Explanations of Why We Care and Why We Forgive,” 126.