It’s amazing to me that nearly every time I see someone get publicly called out or canceled, they inevitably jump off that same cliff like so many canceleds before them: they issue a maudlin, TLDR public apology aimed at everyone and no one that only makes things worse.
As call-outs started to become a major industry, a widely-broadcast apology became an expected juncture in the stations of the cancelation. It was demanded, but rigged to never be good enough. The next act was always scheduled to be escalation. The apology had zero chance of making you or your accusers feel better about anything, it was just part of the show.
Since the apologies never work, you just endlessly apologize, sometimes taking responsibility for much more than what you needed to or was guilty of. At some point the words start losing their meaning, you feel entirely guilty, yet you don't even know what you're sorry for. There is nothing productive in any of that.
Apologize like crazy is exactly what I did during my drama. I apologized, then apologized for my apology, then apologized for over-apologizing. I couldn’t help it, couldn’t stop. But it was just dumping more fuel on the fire. In some ways it also appeared as an admission of guilt to crimes I wasn’t guilty of. There are many things I regret from that period, and my exaggerated display of contrition is one of them.
I'm not saying that if you get called out or canceled that you should never apologize, but only apologize for that which you are guilty of, and apologize only to those for whom it was necessary, and no more than that. If you are pressured to deliver an apology publicly, then you should demand that you are forgiven publicly too. Unless it reaches some formal truth and reconciliation process, don’t expect that to happen.
Looking back on it, I really wish that I never made any forms of public apologies at all. Apologies can be powerful for both sides in a real restorative justice approach, where the goal is to come to a mutual respect and healing through the power of forgiveness, but not if they are acted out for an audience who isn’t looking for any “restorative” outcomes anyway. If there IS something to apologize for, there is nothing wrong with apologies delivered directly, privately, to people who are seeking it, and only if/when they are ready to receive it.
And worse yet, if you are being asked/coerced to apologize for something you didn’t do, although it might not feel possible because of the social pressure, you CAN just pick up your toys and leave. The only response that doesn’t empower an amped up mob is to just cut your losses and don’t play along.
The first time I truly realized that was when the editor of the online journal, Hobart, was being pilloried for interviewing a controversial author. Opinions on the author/mag/editor aside, it looked to be heading in the usual direction: she would lose her journal if she didn’t ceremoniously apologize while trashing the author she interviewed in the process. But she didn’t really apologize at all. Most of her co-editors quit, but she just kept on running Hobart.
Issuing a genuine apology when it’s warranted is a swallowing of pride, an acceptance of humility, and it’s the right thing to do. But note to the freshly canceled: not apologizing — at least not publicly — is an option too, and likely a better one.