zlacker

[parent] [thread] 2 comments
1. berkes+(OP)[view] [source] 2025-11-13 11:08:39
I always presume the "We are sorry" opens up to financial compensation, whereas the "we regret that you are worried" does not.

In my country, this debate is being held WRT the atrocities my country committed in its (former) colonies, and towards enslaved humans¹. Our king and prime minister never truly "apologized". Because, I kid you not, the government fears that this opens up possibilities for financial reparation or compensation and the government doesn't want to pay this. They basically searched for the words that sound as close to apologies as possible, but aren't words that require one to act on the apologies.

¹ I'm talking about The Netherlands. Where such atrocities were committed as close as one and a half generations ago still (1949) (https://www.maastrichtuniversity.nl/blog/2022/10/how-do-dutc...) but mostly during what is still called "The Golden Age".

replies(1): >>mrguyo+9j1
2. mrguyo+9j1[view] [source] 2025-11-13 18:23:12
>>berkes+(OP)
If you are unwilling to say "We are sorry" because "that opens you up to lawsuits" then you are not sorry.

Letting business concerns trump human empathy is exactly the damn problem and exactly why these companies still deserve immense ire no matter how they word their "We don't want to admit fault but we want you to think we care" press release. This is also true of something like the Dutch crown or the USA having tons of people being extremely upset at the suggestion of teaching kids what the US has actually done in it's history.

replies(1): >>berkes+4B3
◧◩
3. berkes+4B3[view] [source] [discussion] 2025-11-14 14:53:55
>>mrguyo+9j1
> If you are unwilling to say "We are sorry" because "that opens you up to lawsuits" then you are not sorry.

Exactly my point, but much better worded. Thanks.

[go to top]