I think the reasoning behind advice for accidents (in the US) is completely separate because after the accident, there are big implications of who is at fault. As the lawyers and insurance on both sides would often battle on technicalities and sometimes appearances, the advice is to let the professionals do it and not give the opponents' side extra ammunition.
This has nothing to do with human emotions or reducing pain for the other side, this is just the nature of the (gov't regulated insurance) beast. My 2c.
> this is just the nature of the (gov't regulated insurance) beast.
It's cultural for it to even go to lawyers. In the UK, in most cases the person at fault would just admit it and give the other person the contact details for their insurance company.
Just to clarify -- even in the US I think the proportion of cases that do go to lawyers is pretty small. But those that do can have a major financial impact.
For example, over the last 20 years I saw maybe 10 car-related accidents in the extended family and all except one of those were simple to deal with -- never went to lawyers, just provide insurance information and move on. But one remaining case, where a school bus hit a family member walking on a sidewalk, took years for two insurance companies to litigate.
Very good observation. The significance of an apology is entirely dependent on the cultural context.
The fallout from BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill comes to mind. British executives failed to provide the gushing (but meaningless) apology the Americans expected until it was too late, and they were skewered in the American press for it. And that particular example concerns two closely related cultures. The results are often more jarring when quite dissimilar cultures are involved.
The higher penalties was probably the result of more than just admission by BP.
Environmentalism had much more of a focus by both the American public and the presidential administration than it did with Exxon’s disaster. The calls for consequences were much louder and supported.
I have apologized before on HN and people vote it up, so no I do not see it. It feels much more like people just dig in their heels due to selfish reasons.
I wouldn't be so sure. I read a book about rhetoric (basically the bread and butter of politicians, marketing and PR) and it strongly advocated never( or almost never) apologizing. I can't remember the exact reasoning but the the assertion was that it rarely has the desired effect and often weakens your position and your ability to actually fix the situation.
Yeah, it was this one:
Thank You for Arguing: What Cicero, Shakespeare and the Simpsons Can Teach Us About the Art of Persuasion
From chapter 23. Recover from a screw-up
```Don’t apologize at all. The problem with an apology is that it belittles you without enlarging your audience. Belittling yourself fails to un-belittle the victim. That’s why apologies often don’t work. They rarely seem sincere enough or extreme enough. And many people—especially men—try to couch their apologies in ways that avoid belittling themselves: “I’m really sorry you feel that way.” Apologies like that only increase the belittlement, implying, “I really wish you weren’t such a sensitive flower.” Try this sometime. Shrink your audience to the size of a plant and watch the anger flow.
Whoa, wait. Aren’t we splitting a hair or two here? When I told my boss how terrible I felt about misplacing a volcano, wasn’t that the same as an apology? Actually, no. Look closely and you will find a critical difference. When you own up to falling short of your own expectations, you emphasize your high standards. Focus on the standards, and you can actually make your ethos bigger in your audience’s eyes. Say you’re sorry, and you shrink.```
I've had apologies in response to corrections be downvoted sometimes. But certainly much less frequently than on Reddit: there, if you apologize, prepare for your original comment and apology to be buried in downvotes.
Well, give jac their fair dues. They said "You can see that dynamic at work here on HN on a daily basis." not "Every single post where someone admits a mistake on Hacker News is guaranteed to be capitalized on by outrage seekers"
(It has worked for US political parties:
http://www.abrahamlincolnonline.org/lincoln/speeches/pierce....
"The democracy of to-day hold the liberty of one man to be absolutely nothing, when in conflict with another man's right of property. Republicans, on the contrary, are for both the man and the dollar; but in cases of conflict, the man before the dollar.")
Joking aside, I think in American culture it's often more important to say "I did $x badly" than "I'm sorry about $x". I feel like many American's (especially in white collar work) assume a certain cut throat mentality and don't believe that you are actually sorry, but they do agree you fucked up. Generally when talking to people you want them to be mentally agreeing with you and not thinking that you're lying to them.
And the car crash thing is just litigation, it doesn't apply to 99% of screwups.
Empty apologies are empty. They need to know that the issue is "owned," regretted, a solution/amend is offered, and it won't happen again. Not a fun time.
Americans, in my experience, don't care. They just find satisfaction in being a bit "better than" I am, and their reactions are purely emotion-driven. They usually would try to pile extra transgressions (that I was not responsible for) onto my apology. Lots of shaming involved.
It was annoying, but I got used to not reacting. Since most of my bosses were Japanese (not really a fun bunch to work for), I didn't need to face the music with Americans too often.
I will say that the end result was that I was given an awesome level of trust and respect. It was the kind very few foreigners ever have.
What profession were you in? I’ve worked at ~10 software companies throughout my career and fessing up to causing an issue was seen as much worse than admitting you fucked up.
I was an engineer and a manager of software development for a very well-known, arch-conservative Japanese optics corporation.
I worked there for just shy of 27 years. LOTS of 14-hour flights (shudder).
But I am not Japanese, so it's quite possible they treated me differently from others.
My experience was, they had a difficult time, trusting non-Japanese. They tended to pull me in, when dealing with westerners.
It was not a "peaches and cream" job. In many ways, it was quite difficult and stressful, but I was in a "silo" of extremely honorable, incredibly high-quality people for a couple of decades.
In all, it was a very different experience than many Americans have had. I am glad for the experience, but also relieved to have it behind me. Although I am an excellent manager, I am most comfortable developing software. Being good at something is not the same as being happy doing it.
I'm not-so-bad at software development, but it's a much bigger pond.
Coming from that corporation, into the modern development landscape in the US has been a...revelation.
Not especially. It is a corporation that is very protective of its privacy and secrets.
I tend not to name it, even though it's fairly easy to figure out.
I don't want to cause them any stress or harm. Even though I wish things had gone somewhat differently, I retain the greatest respect for the corporation, and its employees and officers.
I don’t mention them by name, so my comments don’t show up on their radar screen.
I don’t think I ever say anything that would be an issue, but I don’t want to be in the position of having to explain myself. They protect their brand ferociously.
It worked great, when I worked at a Japanese company. The Japanese respected it.
The Americans, on the other hand, looked at it as a sign of weakness, and tended to "go for the jugular" (Carpe Jugulum).
I think that explains why so many folks "double down," when asked to correct statements.
Also, lawyers.
A standard piece of advice at American accident scenes, is "NEVER say "I'm sorry!""