How sincere are the politician or celebrity apology statements read by spokespersons?

Question

Doesn't it occur to the press that the statement has been written by a lawyer or spin-meister and that the politician or celebrity may or may not have even seen it? Or is it that the media is also playing the game.

Answer 1

The celebrity would be shockingly remiss if s/he did not at least read the statement and approve it.
Now, what makes an apology sincere? 1. An apology could be sincere in that it expresses the person's heartfelt emotions. 2. Or it could be that the person has no such emotions, but understands that what s/he did was wrong and warrants an apology. 3. Or it could be that the person doesn't care about the morality of what s/he did, but understands that it is against his self-interest to have done this thing, and so apologizes in order to regain people's goodwill. 4. Or, the person may just be trying to fool people into trusting him so that he can do the same thing again.
Reasons # 1 & 2 are quite acceptable motives for any apology, in my opinion. # 3 I feel may be acceptable from a public person or somebody I do business with; I am not concerned with these people's inner lives, but only with how they act toward me and others. # 4, of course, is just dishonest.
It seems logical to me that a public figure might hire a lawyer or writer to word the apology for best effect. This is different, of course, from a personal apology by a friend or relative.

Answer 2

The media is definitely in on that mess. They are biased. If they weren't good little sheep, they might lose that exclusive they were hoping for.
But back to the main question, very insincere. If my neighbor's kid threw a rock through my window, I would expect an apology from him, not his mother.
Maybe that's the problem, maybe the celebrity or politician ultimately is not the one in control of the situation.

Answer 3

They probably are not that sincere, but there is a reason why politicians and celebrities have to word things a certain way. Not only do they have to protect their image, but they also have to sometimes shield themselves from any future legal proceedings that may transpire. What you say can and will be held against you. I've learned this lesson in academia.

Answer 4

thanks Grayure. ultimately, a Christian that would want to well known that ex-Christians aren't from now on deluding themselves or anybody else about their sincerity. regrettably, many lifetime Christians won't be able to imagine what that's like no longer to have self belief. even as I agree that it should be not ordinary to understand the ex-Christian stance or conclusions, i locate it infuriating even as someone purports to understand what i think or felt and then summarily brush aside any perspective I easily have on the inspiration that i'm shallow or no longer self-analytical. some atheists take an interest in this web site because we are open minded adequate to proceed to detect our own philosophies and regulate our own inner international.

Answer 5

They are all BS.They don't even convince me that they are genuine.They are trying to save face !And come off really cold and indifferent.The media wins both times.
First during the incident that is being apologized for,and secondly for the apology.

Answer 6

Of course the press is aware; they're simply reporting the news. Doesn't mean they believe it. Giving opinions belongs to the editorial pages.

Answer 7

A LITIGIOUS THOUGHT ISN'T IT ?