214. What Does It Take to Survive a Scandal? AI transcript and summary - episode of podcast No Stupid Questions
Go to PodExtra AI's episode page (214. What Does It Take to Survive a Scandal?) to play and view complete AI-processed content: summary, mindmap, topics, takeaways, transcript, keywords and highlights.
Go to PodExtra AI's podcast page (No Stupid Questions) to view the AI-processed content of all episodes of this podcast.
No Stupid Questions episodes list: view full AI transcripts and summaries of this podcast on the blog
Episode: 214. What Does It Take to Survive a Scandal?
Author: Freakonomics Radio + Stitcher
Duration: 00:38:09
Episode Shownotes
How do you come back from being “canceled”? Are we more likely to forgive someone if they cry? And what makes a successful public apology? SOURCES:Karen Cerulo, professor emeritus of sociology at Rutgers University.Bill Clinton, former president of the United States.David Gergen, professor emeritus of public leadership at the Harvard
Kennedy School; former White House adviser to four U.S. presidents.Benjamin Ho, professor and chair of economics at Vassar College.Monica Lewinsky, activist.John List, professor of economics at the University of Chicago.Brandon Rottinghaus, professor of political science at the University of Houston. RESOURCES:"Slut-Shamed at 22, an Icon at 50 — How Monica Lewinsky Got Her Life Back," by Helen Rumbelow (The Times, 2024)."Do Scandals Matter?" by Brandon Rottinghaus (Political Research Quarterly, 2023)."Toward An Understanding of the Economics of Apologies: Evidence from a Large-Scale Natural Field Experiment," by Basil Halperin, Benjamin Ho, John List, and Ian Muir (The Economic Journal, 2022)."Embodied Remorse: Physical Displays of Remorse Increase Positive Responses to Public Apologies, but Have Negligible Effects on Forgiveness," by Matthew J. Hornsey, Michael J. A. Wohl, Emily A. Harris, Tyler G. Okimoto, Michael Thai, and Michael Wenzel (Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2020)."Commentary: Time for Bill Clinton to Go Away," by Will Rahn (CBS News, 2018)."The Price of Shame," by Monica Lewinsky (TED Talk, 2015)."Apologies Demanded Yet Devalued: Normative Dilution in the Age of Apology," by Tyler G. Okimoto, Michael Wenzel, and Matthew J. Hornsey (Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2015)."Apologies of the Rich and Famous: Cultural, Cognitive, and Social Explanations of Why We Care and Why We Forgive," by Janet M. Ruane and Karen Cerulo (Social Psychology Quarterly, 2014). EXTRAS:"How to Optimize Your Apology," by Freakonomics Radio (2018)."Coal Digger," S1.E5 of Modern Family (2009).
Summary
In this episode of 'No Stupid Questions,' the hosts analyze the complexities of surviving a scandal, emphasizing the role of emotional responses and effective public apologies in reputation recovery. They discuss the polarized nature of modern morality influencing societal reactions, noting how public perception varies based on factors like power dynamics and context. Expert insights from figures such as Monica Lewinsky and Bill Clinton underscore the need for sincerity in apologies, which should prioritize the victim's experience. The episode culminates in exploring the intricate relationship between personal mistakes, public forgiveness, and the potential for redemption in a judgmental society.
Go to PodExtra AI's episode page (214. What Does It Take to Survive a Scandal?) to play and view complete AI-processed content: summary, mindmap, topics, takeaways, transcript, keywords and highlights.
Full Transcript
00:00:03 Speaker_03
Are you really going to make me do this?
00:00:05 Speaker_05
I'm Angela Duckworth.
00:00:07 Speaker_03
I'm Mike Mann. And you're listening to No Stupid Questions.
00:00:12 Speaker_01
Today on the show, how do you restore your image after a scandal?
00:00:16 Speaker_03
I messed up. I know what I did was wrong. Moving forward, you can hold me to a higher standard. Angela, we have an amazing question today about scandal. Scandal? Dun, dun, dun.
00:00:42 Speaker_05
Like the TV show?
00:00:44 Speaker_03
Not the show. Okay. Sorry, I know you got very excited about Kerry Washington. I did. High NSQ.
00:00:50 Speaker_03
Over the last few years, so many celebrities, leaders, politicians, and public figures have been canceled for a range of things from ignorant and thoughtless to egregious and appalling behavior.
00:01:02 Speaker_03
Some of these people have been able to recover their reputation completely, while others appear to have had their image irreparably and permanently damaged. Why does society forgive or forget some of these behaviors, but not others?
00:01:17 Speaker_03
And is there a particular formula for successful recovery from a scandal? Best anonymous. I love this question. Here's my take. They're anonymous. So maybe this is like, hey, guys.
00:01:30 Speaker_05
Oh, is this like I have a friend who got canceled? Any advice for my friend?
00:01:37 Speaker_03
Asking for a quote friend. OK, so one, I will just say that the data is clear on this.
00:01:43 Speaker_03
Just anecdotally, you would know this anyway, but the number of public apologies and cancellations, whatever, have become so vast that they're just everywhere nowadays.
00:01:52 Speaker_05
Wait, scandals are up or apologies are up?
00:01:54 Speaker_03
All the above. Is there a scandal or a public apology or a cancellation that really sticks out to you in your mind?
00:02:01 Speaker_05
OK, I actually have an answer to this, but it's old. So Monica Lewinsky and I were interns at the White House in the very same summer. What? Yes. That particular scandal is one that I had a front row seat to, in a sense. I only met Monica Lewinsky
00:02:21 Speaker_05
once during that summer at a party. And I do recall therefore paying even more attention than most people. I think most people were pretty glued to their screens and the proceedings. But I have wondered, why is it that while many people have forgiven
00:02:37 Speaker_05
Clinton for that scandal. I guess some have not. But you're exactly right. Sometimes these scandals unfold in ways that are like, oh, suddenly everybody's embracing this person again and other times not. So anyway, yes, that is my scandal story.
00:02:52 Speaker_03
That's one of the one that sticks out most to me. Now, partly it's our age and where we were in our formative years. And I was, I think, in high school and it was this massive media frenzy. But here's what I think is interesting.
00:03:05 Speaker_03
It was so anomalous and rare back then that something like that stood out massively.
00:03:11 Speaker_05
the scandal and the apology or just the scandal?
00:03:13 Speaker_03
Both. We now live in what, and I don't remember who coined the phrase, but someone called the age of apology.
00:03:20 Speaker_03
There's a professor of political science at the University of Houston, Brandon Rottinghaus, who talked about how scandals don't hit like they used to, partly, he posits, because media and politics are so divided.
00:03:33 Speaker_03
When something comes out about X person did this or Y person did that, One, often people only get one side of the story. But two, we exercise justification so much that we are like, well, our side can't have done anything bad.
00:03:47 Speaker_05
Right.
00:03:48 Speaker_03
Or we rationalize away instead of holding people to sort of the same standard, regardless of which political affiliation they have.
00:03:55 Speaker_05
I do actually think there's a psychology of taboo, which is underlying why we consider some things a scandal versus like, oh, a bad thing.
00:04:04 Speaker_03
Right. OK, say more about this.
00:04:07 Speaker_05
So every society has these unthinkable acts, these bright lines that you do not cross. Right. Even like naming them is like, you know, they make you take a deep breath.
00:04:18 Speaker_05
And I think what you're saying is that in a polarized society where there is less consensus about the moral right and wrong, even about taboos, which are usually consensual in a society, I mean, that would suggest that like only half of the country is scandalized and the other half is like,
00:04:36 Speaker_05
Meh.
00:04:37 Speaker_03
Yeah, I think it's kind of that, right? I think, one, fewer things are considered taboo in today's day and age. Like, period. Well, think about it. I mean, having a child out of wedlock, you were ostracized, scarlet letter, all these things. Right.
00:04:51 Speaker_05
Not being the dominant religion was also a taboo and would therefore lead to scandal.
00:04:58 Speaker_03
So there's so many things like that, but I'm not sure that it's because different parties consider different things taboo.
00:05:03 Speaker_03
I think it's the different parties will justify their own person's behavior or scandalize someone else's behavior, not using different standards of what's bad, but just saying, like, because you're other, this thing was terrible or because you're of my same party, I'm going to justify your behavior.
00:05:22 Speaker_03
And it's like, oh, well, I can rationalize that. Or that's the worst thing I've ever heard.
00:05:26 Speaker_05
You mean depending on their party affiliation, whether they're Democrat or Republican?
00:05:29 Speaker_03
Yes.
00:05:30 Speaker_05
So you would predict that scandals would be perhaps on the rise if you're like, yeah, I'm going to be scandalized by the thing that the other party is doing because I am so anti that party. Is that what you're saying?
00:05:43 Speaker_03
A hundred percent. One of the things that Rottinghaus, who I just talked about, that professor also talks about is this idea of staff, basically.
00:05:52 Speaker_03
So if you think about it, often the people who survive the scandal are in power versus the people who work for them.
00:05:59 Speaker_03
And I'll never forget, there was a movie that came out when I was in grad school, and David Gergen, who's famously counseled, I don't know, seven, I think, different presidents, a very well-established White House advisor.
00:06:13 Speaker_03
He watched the movie with us, and then we had a Q&A after, and it was a movie about- Is he Republican or Democrat? He's served presidents of both parties. Oh! And we watched this movie about campaigns. And in this movie,
00:06:27 Speaker_03
One of the staffers, for example, had had an affair with the candidate. She got pregnant. She is basically forced to have an abortion. There are all these people covering it up. Da da da.
00:06:38 Speaker_03
Afterwards, we have a Q&A with David Gergen and several other people who've been high-ranking individuals on both Republican and Democratic presidential campaigns.
00:06:48 Speaker_03
And they're like, look, I know many of you are going to go work in presidential politics. Be careful. Staffers in a scandal are more likely to be sort of thrown off to the side.
00:07:00 Speaker_05
So they're saying, like, word to the wise, if you are the underling and you are involved in a scandal, in theory, you should be the one exonerated because you have less power.
00:07:09 Speaker_03
Yeah.
00:07:10 Speaker_05
But in fact, you are more likely to be the one not forgiven.
00:07:15 Speaker_03
You're the one that they're going to try to use to cover themselves up. And you're still the one who's going to get tossed to the curb.
00:07:21 Speaker_05
Now, this didn't happen for Monica Lewinsky, right? Because I don't think Monica Lewinsky was canceled.
00:07:27 Speaker_03
Oh, I think Monica was absolutely canceled.
00:07:29 Speaker_05
You think so? She was like a kid.
00:07:31 Speaker_03
Monica Luenzi basically went into hiding for a couple of decades. She is considered in many ways the first example of cyberbullying because the Internet was just at its dawn. She became the butt of every late night joke.
00:07:46 Speaker_03
I mean, if you think about it, like you just said, she was in essence just a kid.
00:07:49 Speaker_05
Totally.
00:07:50 Speaker_03
Who had had an affair with the most powerful person on the planet.
00:07:54 Speaker_05
Right. If you want to make an argument about power dynamics, the president of the United States and then an intern, what could she have been early 20s at most?
00:08:01 Speaker_03
Yeah.
00:08:02 Speaker_05
So she was cyber bullied.
00:08:04 Speaker_03
Yes.
00:08:05 Speaker_05
Of course, maybe not by a majority of Americans, but by.
00:08:07 Speaker_03
Oh, I think the majority of Americans.
00:08:09 Speaker_05
A majority of Americans thought she was in the wrong.
00:08:13 Speaker_03
Definitely held her accountable and cyber bullied her. Her name became synonymous with scandal.
00:08:19 Speaker_05
Whoa.
00:08:20 Speaker_03
I think we in many ways ruined her life. In fact, I only met Monica Lewinsky once, and it was after she put out her TED talk where she basically, I think 20 something years later, said, I am going to reclaim my story.
00:08:33 Speaker_05
No, I totally respect this. I'm just still a little open jawed. I mean, the last time I saw Clinton on a television screen, you know, I was watching the Democratic National Convention and his extremely long speech.
00:08:46 Speaker_05
I would argue that Bill Clinton is not canceled today. Otherwise, they wouldn't have him at the Democratic National Convention, correct?
00:08:54 Speaker_03
Well, I think that Bill Clinton was not canceled for a long time. Then the Me Too movement came about and it re-shined a spotlight on his behavior. Obviously, he's not canceled to the point where he, as a former president,
00:09:10 Speaker_03
just spoke at the Democratic National Convention. There were a lot of news articles that came out, though, that basically say, hey, Democratic Party. And these are from, you know, Democratic operatives or other less biased sources.
00:09:22 Speaker_03
And they're just kind of like, it's time to move on past Bill Clinton. His behavior was egregious in the past, and we shouldn't continue to have Bill Clinton be part of these events.
00:09:32 Speaker_03
It's I don't I'm making up a term now, but almost like a soft cancel. Let's kind of move on. Right. And also, like, I just think we can't talk about being canceled. And I don't know what you call it. Welcome back into the fold given. Yeah.
00:09:45 Speaker_03
Without also looking at sexism, racism and privilege. I think there are a lot of stories about how different crimes are covered in the news.
00:09:56 Speaker_03
And it may be reported very differently if it's a black male from a low socioeconomic environment versus a white male from a place of privilege who's attending maybe an elite university.
00:10:07 Speaker_03
Maybe we let certain people with privilege, whatever form that privilege takes, money, better looking, different family situations, et cetera, differently. I don't have data,
00:10:17 Speaker_03
But we have to acknowledge that in the world in which we live, when we let people back into the fold versus permanently excommunicate them, there are other factors that weigh in on that, that are not right.
00:10:29 Speaker_05
So we might be more readily forgiving of people for reasons that have nothing to do with their guilt or innocence. That it's not so simple, right?
00:10:38 Speaker_05
I guess regardless of whether scandals are up or down, whether we're morally outraged more or less and why, I did hear about this age of apology in an academic psychology paper.
00:10:50 Speaker_05
And this paper actually, they say, what is the effect of the increasing number of apologies on how apologies are received? And I think maybe that is, in a way, the heart of this question for our dear listener, Anonymous.
00:11:05 Speaker_03
Right. Let me if I could just share a couple of apologies and then maybe you can dive into the psychology. Ben Ho is a economics professor at Vassar and Karen Cirillo is at Rutgers University and is a cultural psychologist.
00:11:19 Speaker_03
So Ben Ho in a 2018 Freakonomics Radio episode, one of our sibling shows, talked about how to optimize your apology and he focused mostly on this idea that an apology has to be costly to be effective.
00:11:32 Speaker_03
And he talked about two types of costs specifically. One is the status apology. He basically said you admit incompetence, you ask for forgiveness, and then in some sense you make yourself look stupid.
00:11:44 Speaker_03
An example he gave is, I'm sorry, that was completely idiotic. If it's done sincerely, then that has some real reputational cost. The other one he talked about was the commitment apology. which he posits can be even more powerful.
00:11:58 Speaker_03
And it's this commitment to do better in the future. So the example there, I messed up. I know what I did was wrong. Moving forward, you can hold me to a higher standard. That one's riskier because it backfires, obviously, if you don't follow through.
00:12:11 Speaker_03
Yes, 100%. So now moving to Cirillo quickly, she did a study of 183 different apologies over a 13-year period from 2000 to 2012. And she looked at only highly visible apologies.
00:12:27 Speaker_03
And what I mean by that is every apology was covered in at least five or more distinct news outlets. All of them had public polling data attached to them. And she then looked at people's reactions to determine whether an apology was effective or not.
00:12:41 Speaker_03
Some examples, Marion Jones was an Olympic athlete who was caught doping. Kevin Rudd was the prime minister of Australia. He apologized on behalf of the nation for removing Aboriginal children from homes and placing them with white families.
00:12:55 Speaker_03
And so his was more an institutional apology.
00:12:57 Speaker_05
That was historical, probably, right?
00:12:59 Speaker_03
Yes.
00:13:00 Speaker_05
He was not directly responsible for that.
00:13:02 Speaker_03
He was, yeah, not around at all, but said, let's finally make apology for this. So my point is there's this vast difference in all the public apologies that she looked at.
00:13:11 Speaker_03
And she said the most successful apologies followed a similar pattern and the least effective ones. Most successful, you focus on the victim. So you start by talking about who is hurt. Talk very little about yourself or any personal justifications.
00:13:27 Speaker_03
And then you end by talking about how sorry you are. If possible, you make restitutions.
00:13:33 Speaker_03
Now, I know this is a little obvious, but she says that in all of her research, she was surprised at how few people could make an effective apology and said that of all of these she studied over this decade plus period, less than a third of public apologies were effective with the public based on poll data.
00:13:51 Speaker_05
Meaning, I think, that we don't forgive those people. So maybe if you want to say, what does it mean to be canceled? I mean, there's no dictionary definition, I think, that you could be like, oh, that's what it means to be canceled.
00:14:03 Speaker_05
But I think there's an absence of forgiveness, like you are not forgiven. And so these are ways that you can be forgiven and welcomed back into the fold, these two research studies.
00:14:14 Speaker_03
Yes, and these focus more specifically on apologies that led to forgiveness.
00:14:17 Speaker_05
But only one out of three did.
00:14:19 Speaker_03
Yeah.
00:14:19 Speaker_05
In that last study that you mentioned.
00:14:21 Speaker_03
Exactly.
00:14:22 Speaker_05
Okay, so the things that she said is like you have to focus on the person who was wronged, not on yourself.
00:14:28 Speaker_03
Right.
00:14:29 Speaker_05
And then you have to sincerely and abjectly admit wrongdoing.
00:14:33 Speaker_03
Right. I mean, she even goes so far as to use the word at one point, mortification, and defines it as the unequivocal expression of shame, guilt, or remorse. I mean, you have to express that you are mortified by what you did.
00:14:45 Speaker_03
So her advice is very simply, don't wait. So forget your ego, forget everything else, apologize immediately. Don't apologize for what people thought. apologize for what you did.
00:14:56 Speaker_03
So too many people come out and say, like, I'm sorry that people misunderstood me. I'm sorry that people misinterpreted that.
00:15:03 Speaker_05
Right. Or I'm sorry that you feel that way. The classic.
00:15:06 Speaker_03
Yes.
00:15:06 Speaker_05
I'm sorry that you're so upset. You're like, oh, my God, I want to kill you.
00:15:10 Speaker_03
Turns out that doesn't work.
00:15:11 Speaker_05
That just puts kerosene on the fire.
00:15:14 Speaker_03
So don't wait and then apologize for what you did, not what people thought. Don't give context. I thought that was interesting. It totally makes sense to me. She said people don't care why you did it.
00:15:25 Speaker_03
Why you did it is less important than just expressing regret and remorse. We don't need context, we just need to say, hey, I'm so sorry, what I did was wrong.
00:15:35 Speaker_03
So when it comes to Bill Clinton's apologies, Cerullo, she said the number one issue with his apology is one it took so long to be made, and then it was made so many times because he did such a bad job, but eventually he got to the National Prayer Service where he was doing an apology there, and she and others say that that is the most effective
00:15:56 Speaker_03
one when he actually showed sorrow that looked genuine and actually even named Lewinsky apologizing to her and for what he'd actually done.
00:16:06 Speaker_03
And I think Angela and I would love to hear your thoughts on what it takes to successfully recover from a scandal.
00:16:12 Speaker_03
So record a voice memo in a quiet place with your mouth close to the phone and email it to us at nsq at freeconomics.com and maybe we'll play it on a future episode of the show.
00:16:21 Speaker_03
You can also spread the word on social media or leave a review in your podcast app.
00:16:28 Speaker_01
Still to come on No Stupid Questions, how does body language influence forgiveness?
00:16:34 Speaker_03
If anyone got on their knees to apologize, that's so dramatic, it just feels not useful.
00:16:48 Speaker_01
Now, back to Mike and Angela's conversation about recovering from scandal.
00:16:56 Speaker_05
So, you know, forgiveness is its own mystery covered in enigma, you know, swirling in the unknown.
00:17:02 Speaker_05
But if you just assume that there is such a thing as being forgiven, and we do sometimes do it, the question of like when we're forgiven, I mean, I think most people are not going to experience being canceled, but I think all of us will do something at some point where we wish to be forgiven.
00:17:18 Speaker_05
Right. You know, this professor of economics at Vassar, you mentioned Ben Ho. I was like, why do I know that name? He was a co-author on the paper that was on Uber and on apologies.
00:17:29 Speaker_05
And Stephen Dubner and I have talked about this, but I'll just recap it because it's so clever. It was published in 2021.
00:17:36 Speaker_05
But the origin story is that John List, who was, I think, the chief economist for Uber at the time, and Uber had chief economists so that they could do really clever experiments that would help them have a better app.
00:17:49 Speaker_05
And John one day orders an Uber and it doesn't come. It's really pissed off. And he decides to study what happens when you're a customer of this app and you're just so angry because it failed you.
00:18:03 Speaker_05
And the operative question was like, is there anything Uber can do to make it up for you? Can they repair this ruptured relationship? So when a rider
00:18:13 Speaker_05
on Uber had a trip that was in the bottom 5% of time of arrival for your particular geographic region, then you were then randomly assigned to different apology conditions. Some people would get an email
00:18:29 Speaker_05
that would say, like, here's a $5 gift card to your next ride. The basic apology was like, oh, no, your trip took longer than we estimated. There was a status apology, like, language like, you know, we know our estimate was off. So sort of taking some
00:18:46 Speaker_05
responsibility. And there was a commitment apology, by the way, like we're working hard to give you arrival times that you can count on. And one of the major findings was, quote, money speaks louder than words.
00:18:57 Speaker_05
I think when you said the apology should be costly to quote the paper, the best form of apology is to include a coupon for a future trip. But applying personally.
00:19:07 Speaker_03
Sorry, I just have this image of like Hey, I'm so sorry for sounding egregious. And I'm like, here's twenty dollars. In a personal view, it sort of cheapens the apology, but I totally get it from a corporate standpoint.
00:19:19 Speaker_05
Yes. I don't think you really want to like Venmo people directly after having like a blowout fight with your best friend or something. But the larger point is the costliness.
00:19:28 Speaker_05
I think actually just to speculate why it is that that rings true to us or that moves us more is maybe that we have a little bit of an eye for an eye. You know, maybe it's part of human nature to say, like, you hurt me.
00:19:42 Speaker_05
It's only right that you get hurt.
00:19:45 Speaker_03
There's a silly Modern Family episode that I love.
00:19:47 Speaker_05
I love Modern Family. They're all silly and they're all amazing.
00:19:51 Speaker_03
But there's one where Gloria, who is this beautiful Colombian young-ish woman who married Jay, you know, the grandpa. The older guy, yeah. And she's basically the same age as Jay's daughter. So the stepmom and the daughter are basically the same age.
00:20:08 Speaker_03
And the stepdaughter, who is Claire, had at one point called Gloria a gold digger. I recall this. And that comes out at a family dinner and Gloria is upset. And she said, what do I need to do to prove to you all that I really just love your dad?
00:20:23 Speaker_03
I'm not in it for the money. And she's like, here, take the bracelets back, take the earrings, take the whatever. And Claire comes up to the room and apologizes to Gloria and says, hey, I'm really sorry.
00:20:31 Speaker_03
I shouldn't have said that when you first started dating my dad. I mean, look at you, look at him. You'll understand why I had some concerns. What can I do to get your forgiveness?
00:20:41 Speaker_03
And interestingly, in this restitution sense, Gloria says, I want you to go jump in the swimming pool with all your clothes on.
00:20:48 Speaker_05
Is that what she says? I don't remember this. OK, so then what happens?
00:20:51 Speaker_03
The whole family goes outside and Claire is standing at the edge of the pool and she's like, wait, are you really going to make me get in? Like I've shown I'm willing.
00:20:59 Speaker_05
You have to know that Claire is like the uptight person who would not jump into the pool with her clothes on.
00:21:04 Speaker_03
So she says, are you really going to make me do this? I'm standing at the edge of the pool. I'm showing you that I'm willing to jump in. And Gloria just looks at her and says, yes, you have to jump in. So Claire jumps in with all her clothes on.
00:21:15 Speaker_03
And then next, Jay, the older gentleman, pushes Gloria. into the pool.
00:21:22 Speaker_03
And then the whole family jumps in and this idea of restitution, while it wasn't monetary, there was some cost that she had to pay, but it also turned into this joyful act of forgiveness where it was this memorable moment where the whole family is in the pool with all their clothes on.
00:21:37 Speaker_05
Okay, I'm gonna go like way out on a limb and now interpret that episode of Modern Family as if it were a parable from the Bible, okay? So like, if Claire were, like, dunked into the water, right? And then everybody's, like, sort of laughing at her.
00:21:50 Speaker_05
That would not have been a good ending. But then what they showed is that she was truly welcomed back into the fold. Such is the brilliance of modern family.
00:21:59 Speaker_05
Yes, there's a costly apology, but it then follows with true forgiveness and, like, true acceptance.
00:22:05 Speaker_03
versus a public shaming.
00:22:06 Speaker_05
And I think what this research is showing is that there is some instinct we have that there has to be a true cost to the person who is the transgressor. Maybe it's because we have some base instinct for an eye for an eye.
00:22:18 Speaker_05
We're like, you have to jump into the pool and like be slightly humiliated in the way that you made me feel humiliated when you called me a gold digger.
00:22:26 Speaker_03
Which, by the way, I don't think those were equal offenses. I think gold digger is much more offensive than making someone jump in a pool.
00:22:32 Speaker_05
Yes.
00:22:33 Speaker_03
But they had negotiated this. And I love how you said it was not a public shaming where everyone then ridicules Claire.
00:22:39 Speaker_05
Yeah, it's actually also not an eye for an eye. By the way, a five dollar coupon is not the same thing as like, OK, now I'm going to make you five minutes late. You know, you know, I'm going to make you miss a flight. Right.
00:22:47 Speaker_05
So it's not exactly that, but I still think it has this like base note of like restitution or symmetry.
00:22:54 Speaker_05
But then I think for there to be, because you said this, I think about Ben Ho's research, like what makes an apology effective is not only that you can see that this costs me, but also this commitment that you have to follow through on in the future.
00:23:07 Speaker_05
I'm also thinking about other research on body language of apologies. There was an article in Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
00:23:16 Speaker_05
about embodied remorse, and it's about when you make a public apology, whether you include a physical display of remorse or you don't. So the two physical displays of remorse, one is getting down on your knees.
00:23:32 Speaker_03
Oh, come on. I'm not kidding. No, I believe you, but that doesn't have a place in public apology.
00:23:40 Speaker_05
You're like, when has that happened?
00:23:41 Speaker_03
And also, if anyone got on their knees to apologize, That's so dramatic, it just feels not useful.
00:23:50 Speaker_05
You'd be like, oh, it must be insincere because it's so melodramatic almost.
00:23:55 Speaker_03
Yeah. I'm really interested to hear more about this, but I call immediate BS. Like who's going to get down on their knees and apologize?
00:24:04 Speaker_05
In the paper that I'm talking about, there were descriptions of an actual historical event. Do you know about the Tokyo Electric Power Company and the nuclear disaster?
00:24:15 Speaker_03
I think there was one about 10 years ago. Right. I don't remember anything about an apology. I do remember that there were these elderly Japanese men who worked there. who basically said to go fix this.
00:24:29 Speaker_03
We're going to go in because we've lived good lives and we're going to make sure that younger people don't have to be exposed. And it was this beautiful example of self-sacrifice in order to kind of bless generations.
00:24:41 Speaker_03
That's what I remember, which has nothing to do with apologies or scandal.
00:24:45 Speaker_05
I mean, I'll say that this experiment, you're just a volunteer right now. Time has passed, but you're told about this. You're given factual information about what the disaster was and then also, you know, the public statement that was made.
00:24:59 Speaker_05
You know, there was an image. And it says, you know, when you're looking at these materials, like the picture below is a still, a still photo from the press conference. And then there's two conditions.
00:25:11 Speaker_05
In one condition, the representatives of the company are sitting at a desk. in front of microphones, but in another condition, in the treatment condition, in the embodiment condition, they would say.
00:25:23 Speaker_05
In that condition, the representatives are away from their desks, kneeling with their palms pressed to the floor. So these are both true photos. It's just that they're taken at different times.
00:25:34 Speaker_05
But in the embodiment condition, I don't think American executives would do this.
00:25:38 Speaker_03
That's what I was going to say. I wonder culturally if there's a very different sense of that.
00:25:44 Speaker_05
Yeah, no, you're not going to get anybody in like American culture to like it just it's not in our vernacular. Right. Like we don't do this. So it would be so odd. But they did have other studies where instead of kneeling, there was like crying.
00:25:57 Speaker_05
So there have been actual public apologies where the transgressor seemingly spontaneously one could get more cynical than that, but they're crying as they issue their apology. And either way, crying and kneeling are nonverbal. Crying I buy, by the way.
00:26:13 Speaker_03
Like, I'll be susceptible to that.
00:26:15 Speaker_05
You might even buy kneeling just within that cultural context, right?
00:26:18 Speaker_03
Exactly. And that I want to acknowledge. Mine was an ethnocentric reaction to that.
00:26:22 Speaker_05
So this embodiment, right? So seeing pictures of people like physically either with crying or with kneeling, you know, showing their remorse, it actually did increase the viewer's ratings of like how much you think this person does have remorse.
00:26:38 Speaker_05
In other research, I have generally found that sometimes it's easy in the world of texting and email to miss the importance of non-verbal cues.
00:26:47 Speaker_05
This is one reason I think people will always need to have some face-to-face contact to have truly meaningful relationships. By the way, if you're going to apologize to someone, I'm going to go out on a limb and say, Don't do it by text.
00:27:00 Speaker_05
Don't DM the person because these nonverbal cues and also a tone of voice and other research that I've done is like so important. You don't get that in a text message.
00:27:10 Speaker_05
But the take home of this multi-study investigation is that it does matter for how much people think you're sorry.
00:27:17 Speaker_03
You're saying it being body language.
00:27:19 Speaker_05
Yeah, this kind of embodiment. It also matters for being perceived positively, so the transgressor, we have more empathy for them, etc.
00:27:28 Speaker_05
But one of the interesting things about this research is that this embodied remorse did not have any significant effect on being forgiven.
00:27:38 Speaker_03
Really?
00:27:38 Speaker_05
In actually any other study.
00:27:41 Speaker_03
It's so I just think it's more sincere, but I'm not more likely to forgive you.
00:27:44 Speaker_05
And this is why forgiveness is so interesting to me. Like, what is it to be forgiven? Because we can know that you're sincere. And I've experienced this, too. So, you know, I've shared with you before that Jason and I rarely have arguments.
00:27:56 Speaker_05
But when I get mad, I mean, I really. You've never seen it, but I get really, really, really mad. And I have wondered to myself, why is it that if Jason is sincerely sorry, I can see that he's sincerely sorry. And yet I still don't forgive him.
00:28:12 Speaker_05
Like, what is that? I don't know, it's something which is still beyond my understanding as a psychologist. I mean, I have to bring up, so my therapist, Dee, has given me this expression that has been so useful.
00:28:26 Speaker_05
And again, I have more interest in private apologies than public apologies. I mean, I hope I don't have to ever make a public apology, but I think the dynamics are the same.
00:28:36 Speaker_05
So Dee says that all relationships are such that there is going to be rupture and repair.
00:28:42 Speaker_05
And what she means by this is that any relationship, including ours, Mike, right, like that there will be a time where trust is ruptured, where understanding is ruptured and then they're repaired.
00:28:53 Speaker_05
So I think to me, the art of apologizing is about repairing that which has been ruptured. And I think these pro tips are great. You know, don't wait. Be sincere. Don't talk about extenuating circumstances. Own it. Commit.
00:29:08 Speaker_05
But for me, that phrase rupture and repair, has been like a guiding light because it also tells me that it's normal. Maybe scandals are not normal, but you should expect friendships to be ruptured and then you should expect them to be repaired.
00:29:24 Speaker_05
The thing that I've always been raised with is forgiveness is always the right thing to do. So if you have been either a victim or a bystander, the morally higher road is to forgive. Maybe not to forget, but to forgive and to repair.
00:29:41 Speaker_03
I will say I'm with you 100 percent on a personal level. I know that I am human and I know that I make mistakes all the time. Hopefully not of the egregious variety. Like you, I hope there's never a public apology.
00:29:53 Speaker_05
Hopefully not at scandal level.
00:29:55 Speaker_03
Right. But yes, I think that we all have occasion to apologize every day. I will say that I hope I am very forgiving to others because I want people to be forgiving to us.
00:30:06 Speaker_03
And I wonder, again, maybe in the societal framework of scandal and being canceled, I wonder if part of it is for some people we cancel them because their behavior is so obviously and systemically bad that we view that as a reflection of their character versus there are some individuals who committed
00:30:30 Speaker_03
an act.
00:30:32 Speaker_05
It was a terrible action, but they're not a terrible person.
00:30:35 Speaker_03
Right. And so we can put in context Harvey Weinstein had perpetual, abusive, horrific actions against so many women over so many years that we have the context to say, you're not welcome back.
00:30:50 Speaker_03
Whereas an individual who made a mistake, I hope we also have, as individuals in society, the willingness to say, I'm not gonna judge you by your worst day. I hope people would grant that same grace or forgiveness to me.
00:31:06 Speaker_05
I mean, I think the thing that you're saying is that there is no formula for a successful recovery if this is a deeply motivated, persistent character flaw.
00:31:16 Speaker_05
And if it isn't, then there are these tactical things, like if you really just screwed up, but you're basically well-intentioned, then apologize immediately and do it with body language and have a little skin in the game and commit to doing differently and follow through on that commitment.
00:31:31 Speaker_05
But if, on the other hand, you are Harvey Weinstein, We don't have a recipe for you.
00:31:36 Speaker_03
Yeah, I'm so sorry.
00:31:42 Speaker_01
Coming up after the break, a fact check of today's episode and stories from our NSQ listeners. And now, here's a fact check of today's conversation.
00:31:59 Speaker_01
David Gergen, a political commentator and professor emeritus of public leadership at Harvard Kennedy School, has served as advisor to four, not seven, former presidents, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and Clinton.
00:32:13 Speaker_01
Mike explains that University of Houston professor Brandon Rottinghaus has found that politicians are more likely than their staff members to survive a scandal.
00:32:22 Speaker_01
We should note that he found that to be true for elected officials, as opposed to appointees, because of the extensive process that is often required to remove elected officials from their positions.
00:32:34 Speaker_01
Mike also says that the majority of Americans cyberbullied former White House intern-turned-activist Monica Lewinsky. it's true that most Americans did not view her favorably.
00:32:46 Speaker_01
A CNN poll from 1999 reported that 70% of those surveyed did not have a sympathetic view of Lewinsky. However, this doesn't mean that they were cyberbullying her. In fact, a New York Times article from the same year stated that only 50% of U.S.
00:33:04 Speaker_01
adults used the internet at that time. Also, the colloquial verb cancel does, in fact, have an official definition.
00:33:13 Speaker_01
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, it means, quote, "...to publicly boycott, ostracize, or withdraw support from a person, institution, etc. thought to be promoting culturally unacceptable ideas."
00:33:27 Speaker_01
Finally, Angela misstates the incident that prompted University of Chicago economist John List to begin investigating effective apologies for Uber. The issue wasn't that List's ride never showed up.
00:33:40 Speaker_01
In fact, the driver did pick him up at his home, but instead of taking List to his intended location, a meeting of the American Economics Association at which he was scheduled to deliver the keynote speech,
00:33:51 Speaker_01
The driver ferried List around in circles for 25 minutes before arriving back at his house. That's it for the Fact Check. Before we wrap today's show, let's hear some thoughts about last week's episode on what it means to be evil.
00:34:08 Speaker_00
Hi Mike and Angela. Your discussion on the nature of evil reminded me of a quote from Jean Renoir's masterpiece, The Rules of the Game. In the film, Octave, played by Renoir himself, says,
00:34:26 Speaker_00
Renoir's point is that dismissing a horrific act by labeling someone as pure evil can be strangely comforting.
00:34:33 Speaker_00
It allows us to sidestep the difficult work of considering ways to prevent such acts, or even the harder work of understanding the motivations behind the actions, much like Namikov forces us to do in Lolita.
00:34:47 Speaker_00
The truly unsettling part, the terrifying thing, is realizing that each one of us might be capable of committing an evil act, given the right reasons.
00:34:57 Speaker_04
This is in response to your episode on evil. I have to say, this is something I've been thinking about since childhood, and it's probably my nature to try to understand people before making a blanket judgment on them.
00:35:13 Speaker_04
Perhaps this is helpful in my life in many ways. It's led me to be open to many people in my life, but I am currently going through the realization that the relationship that I'm currently in the middle of ending was an abusive one.
00:35:29 Speaker_04
And unfortunately, I think my understanding that somebody isn't just bad, somebody isn't just a jerk, you know, there's a reason and there's mental illness and there's still goodness in that person.
00:35:43 Speaker_04
I almost look at it overly nuanced and now I'm realizing that Had I just called a spade a spade or just recognized what I was dealing with, I could have avoided a lot of pain for myself and my children. Anyhow, that's my answer today. Thanks.
00:36:02 Speaker_01
That was, respectively, Dan Jatowski and a listener who would like to remain anonymous. Thanks to them and to everyone who shared their stories with us. And remember, we'd love to hear your thoughts on scandal and public apologies.
00:36:16 Speaker_01
Send a voice memo to nsq at Freakonomics.com and you might hear your voice on the show. That's coming up next week on No Stupid Questions.
00:36:45 Speaker_01
No Stupid Questions is part of the Freakonomics Radio Network, which also includes Freakonomics Radio, People I Mostly Admire, and The Economics of Everyday Things. All our shows are produced by Stitcher and Renbud Radio.
00:36:59 Speaker_01
The senior producer of the show is me, Rebecca Lee Douglas, and Lyric Bowditch is our production associate. This episode was mixed by Greg Rippin with help from Jeremy Johnston. We had research assistance from Dalvin Abawaji.
00:37:13 Speaker_01
Our theme song was composed by Luis Guerra. You can follow us on Twitter at NSQ underscore show and on Facebook at NSQ show. If you have a question for a future episode, please email it to NSQ at Freakonomics dot com.
00:37:28 Speaker_01
To learn more or to read episode transcripts, visit Freakonomics dot com slash NSQ. Thanks for listening.
00:37:45 Speaker_05
I was assigned to be the assistant to the assistant to the assistant to the assistant to the assistant for Al Gore.