Apologies originating from large global corporations may likely be fauxpologies to protect brand image and prevent customer loss. It is therefore necessary for these apologies to be carefully examined through the analysis of felicity conditions, elements of interpersonal apologies, and persuasion strategies. Recently, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) accused the globally recognized corporation, Volkswagen, for utilizing a manipulative software in their automobiles to trick emission tests.
Since 2009, the software enabled their cars to emit less pollution during the emission tests than they did on the road. Approximately 11 million cars worldwide were equipped with this device. 1 Additionally, cars marketed as clean diesel technology promoted high sales and support from the public. 1 | will focus on the apology made by the former CEO of Volkswagen, Martin Winterkorn. The parties involved consists of Volkswagen, the EPA, stock holders, and Volkswagen customers. I obtained my sources from the internet: news articles from the Hindu1, France 242, and the Province3, as well as a youtube video4. I chose a video to observe the delivery of the apology and selected news articles from different countries (Canada, France, India).
I did not choose articles within the same country to obtain a world-wide perspective on the issue. In the articles, the parties were unequally represented and the writers gave greater coverage towards sides opposing Volkswagen. Specifically, greater detail were given on the environmental consequences, predicted fines, fall of stocks and shares, as well as the breakage of trust. The unequal distribution may be due to the severity of the crime on the global scale and the lack of support defending Volkswagen. The reporters may have felt ersonally affected, especially if they were consumers of Volkswagen diesel technology or environmentally conscious individuals.
This could have caused a biased representation of the apology, emphasizing the negative light on Volkswagen. The apology obeyed the felicity condition for appropriate apologetic words, specifically in, “I am endlessly sorry”, and “I apologize sincerely”. 4 The words sorry and apologize are common illocutionary force indicating devices (IFID). The apology was videotaped and uploaded to the Volkswagen’s website, available in German and English. It was publicly accessible, allowing customers, stock holders, and dealerships to view the apology. However, since the incident affected cars worldwide, dealerships and customers in countries such as South Korea may have difficulty comprehending the apology.
Although Volkswagen obeys the felicity condition of an appropriate audience, they did not consider non-English speakers. Furthermore, the video was uploaded fairly quickly following the accusation, specifically 5 days. 2 It was taped in a professional setting where Winterkorn appeared to be in a conference room. Thus, the reasonable timing and location obeyed the felicity condition for an appropriate situation. Finally, although Winterkorn used the word, sincerely, to describe his apology, it is necessary to take past scandals into consideration. Although none of their past incidents were as severe, Volkswagen has been involved in a series of controversies ranging from sex scandals to briberies. The history of sleazy behaviour raises the possibility that Winterkorn’s apology was insincere and an abuse, due to the likelihood they will be involved in a future scandal.
Two of the five elements of interpersonal apologies were obeyed, specifically the use of IFID and future forbearance. Winterkorn stated that manipulation in Volkswagen will never happen again and they will do everything they can to win back trust. 4 However, the remaining three elements were absent: acceptance of responsibility, explanation of behaviour, and offer of reparation. As CEO, Winterkorn failed to take responsibility for the incident and attempted to shift blame onto a few individuals.
Additionally, a few days following the apology release, Winterkorn announced his resignation, however he denied any personal wrongdoings. 6 Furthermore, while Winterkorn claimed Volkswagen will do everything they can to revert the damage4, there were no clear offers or plans of compensation. Lastly, he failed to provide an explanation as to why the incident occurred, and rather insisted he had no knowledge whatsoever. 4 He appears dishonest because it is hard to believe the top executives of a highly reputable company were completely unaware for nearly 7 years.
Overall, Winterkorn’s apology was infelicitous due to the absence of various contributing factors in an appropriate apology: sincerity, offers of reparation, acceptance of blame and explanation of behaviour. The apology did not fit the offence because the consequences on both human health and the environment cannot be compensated by a video clip. Winterkorn’s apology is a potential fauxpology in an attempt to save the reputation of both himself and the brand after being caught red-handed. Ethos most commonly used persuasion strategy. Winterkorn frequently stressed the concept of trust and how highly trusted their company is worldwide.
He stated the incident went against the core values Volkswagen stands for 4 This strategy was used to persuade the audience into believing the company is trustworthy and this type of behaviour is out of character. Additionally, Winterkorn states Volkswagen will be as transparent and open as possible throughout the investigation. 4 This persuades the audience into believing Volkswagen is honest, reliable, and incapable of such a deception. The use of pathos was also identified, in which Winterkorn brought to attention the hard work and dedication of their 600,000 employees.
He insisted his team did not deserve the blame for the misact of a few individuals. 4 This appeals to the emotions because a person may feel harsh to criticize Volkswagen when the majority of its employees are innocent. Furthermore, Winterkorn stated the clarification of the situation is his top priority because he owes it to customers, employees and the public. 4 This tricks the audience into feeling prioritized and cared for. Furthermore, it could persuade them to overlook Winterkorn’s true apologetic intentions, which is likely brand protection and his own reputation.
Personally, I would not accept Martin Winterkorn’s apology. Winterkorn failed to take personal fault and attempted to shift the mess onto a few individuals. This was later confirmed by his resignation letter where he stated it was for the best of the company and he did not commit any wrongdoings. Also, believe Winterkorn was dishonest because it is difficult to believe such a respectable company would be ignorant enough to overlook a severe system malfunction for nearly 7 years. Thus, the apology seemed forced in order to protect Volkswagen and Winterkorn’s own reputation.
Additionally, in the video, Winterkorn lacked emotion in his facial expressions and tone of voice. 4 This made him appear insincere and detached to his apology. Also, it seemed very rehearsed or as if there was a script behind cameras, making Winterkorn appear almost robotic and non-human like. Furthermore, the severity of the issue itself contributes to my unwillingness to accept his apology. They deceived and placed people’s lives at risk for the sake of making profit. Overall, it is difficult to accept an apology coming from a top-selling company because at the end of the day, what truly matters is money and brand reputation.
Tam personally affected by pathos and logos more than I am by ethos. I would have been more inclined to accept his apology if Winterkorn displayed greater emotional aspects in his video speech through facial expressions or the tone of his voice. I personally believe if an individual is truly apologetic, they would show vulnerability rather than remaining emotionally absent. I may feel this way because I am an emotional person and when I am truly sorry, it is clear in my face even without words.
Also, as a science student, I value the facts and evidences underlying situations. Thus, the lack of reasonable explanations provided leads me to believe Winterkorn was hiding the truth in order to save s prestigious reputation. In conclusion, despite the smart techniques used to appear apologetic and undeserving of criticism, I was not convinced by Winterkorn’s apology. Due to existing negative perceptions of corporate apologies, companies should take above-average measures if they truly wish to receive forgiveness for their actions.
