Can Public Apologies Pressure People to Forgive Their Abusers?

Public apologies in the form of videos disseminated via social media, such as Justin Timberlake’s Instagram apology in February 2021, have become almost cliché. Accusations of abuse, assault or misconduct are made against a celebrity, then said celebrity posts a video apologizing for their transgressions and vowing to change their behavior. But do these virtual-mea culpas actually work to convince the victims to forgive? I don’t think so.

• What is PTSD?

I believe that these so-called apologies have nothing to do with actually making amends, but are rather a means of saving face for so many who, while rarely held accountable in a court of law for their actions, stand to lose a lot in the court of public opinion. Endorsements, contracts, future jobs, sales of merchandise, “likes” and “followers” — the almighty dollar is a powerful motivation for those behaving badly that get caught to go on the record and try to convince others that they have seen the error of their ways. It’s almost like a virtual confessional, if you will.

Frankly, I am unconvinced. As a survivor, I would view such an apology as merely a publicity stunt, not a genuine apology. As stated by world-renowned clinical psychologist Harriet Lerner, author of “Why Won’t You Apologize? Healing Big Betrayals and Everyday Hurts,” there are nine steps to a good apology, most of which are scarcely met by these knee-jerk face-saving public apologies.

1. It does not include the word “but.”

2. It keeps the focus on your actions, not the other person’s response.

3. It does not overdo.

4. It doesn’t get caught up in who is to blame or who started it.

5. Needs to be backed with corrective action.

6. It requires that you do your best to avoid a repeat performance.

7. Should not serve to silence others.

8. It shouldn’t be offered if it risks making the hurt person feel worse.

9. It does not ask the hurt party to do anything, not even to forgive.

Read that last one carefully, because in the end, that is the point of this whole article. Forgiveness is personal, optional and takes time. It’s not something that can be coerced. Public pressure or shame shouldn’t be used as a weapon to force someone to forgive. In fact, I’d include a tenth step to this list: An apology should be something that occurs privately between the two parties involved. It should be something that comes from genuine remorse and not from any sense of obligation or fear of retaliation. That is perhaps the biggest issue with public apologies. 

Not to say that some public apologies aren’t better scripted than others, indicating a better and more sincere recognition of what the individual has done to require the apology, but it is my sense that these are few and far between. Ultimately, whether they lead to forgiveness is up to each individual, but it is my contention that while forgiveness may be publicly professed, it may be just as insincere as the apology.

I personally have yet to get the kind of apology that I would require to even begin to consider forgiving my abusers. And even if I did, forgiveness wouldn’t necessarily mean what people think it does, at least not in the context of a kind of moral obligation for healing that so many religious dogmas espouse. To forgive doesn’t mean to forget or even to reconcile. It may just mean being able to no longer allow that individual or what they have done to occupy real estate within your mind or heart. It could just look like liberation from the emotional charge of the hurt and a sense of peace.

Everyone’s healing journey is unique. Insisting upon forgiveness is a horrible and retraumatizing criterion for healing. It places the onus on the survivor or one who has been hurt to somehow right a wrong, rather than encouraging meaningful change on the part of the abuser and society to do better. I hope that survivors can ignore public pressure and allow themselves the time to thoughtfully consider what is right for them.