The Business of Apology

The Shunning of Paula Deen 

The Paula Deen saga has chewed up a huge amount of time in mainstream and social media, around the dinner table and at the proverbial water cooler. The issue, the person, the entanglements are all hard to resist – I'll admit to tweeting about her five times. (Six, when I finish this article and attempt to get some views.)

The Food Network, Smithfield Foods, Walmart, Target, Caesars Entertainment, QVC, Novo Nordisk, Sears, Kmart, J.C. Penney, and Random House have ended or suspended their ties with Ms. Deen. These actions are related to her admission in a lawsuit deposition that she used the N-word 30 years ago.

However, I believe it’s a more complicated issue. After all, her proclivities have been known for some time. In a 2012 NYT interview about slavery in the Old South, she stated, "They were like our family." Being bought and sold, held against your will, and forced to work are not consistent with the definition of family. This offers a striking example of a person devoid of empathy. Yet, despite this on the record, Deen’s empire grew.

I believe that Deen could have survived admitting to using the N-word if she had apologized in a coherent, timely, and authentic manner, and taken proactive steps, such as getting involved with an anti-discrimination project. Instead, there was chaos. A video apology, labeled a “statement,” was posted but removed hours later (though you can view the video here). In under a minute, there are four very noticeable splices, suggesting that her public relations team had to piece together several messages. One has to wonder what was cut! While she claims that “inappropriate, hurtful language is totally, totally unacceptable,” Deen spends more time pleading for forgiveness. It comes across as a self-centered, woe-is-me jumble.

A second apology video was posted, but it didn’t begin with any expression of remorse towards her fans, patrons, business partners, or the community. Instead, her words were directed at Matt Lauer for standing him up on the TODAY Show. She explained that her pain “has been tremendous.” Deen then proceeded to blame “the press” for an inaccurate portrayal of her and her family. In business, entertainment, or politics, those who are defeated, fired, or guilty often find a way to blame the media.

Video apology number three was directed again, incredibly, to Matt Lauer. Deen and/or her public relations counsel must have been terrified of making an enemy of him. She said, “I was physically in no shape to come in and talk with you. The last 48 hours have been very, very hard.” Sorry for your pain, Paula.

After five days of additional preparation, however, Paula Deen finally appeared on the TODAY show. When Lauer asked how she was doing, Deen missed the opportunity to launch into an explanation, if not an apology. Instead, her narcissism took over, and she responded, “I was overwhelmed. I was in a state of shock… There have been some very, very hurtful lies about me.”

Then Lauer pounced. “Are you here to stop the financial bleeding?” he asked. He knew, as did many others, that she was there to rescue her business interests. Deen attempted to stay positive and expressed her lifelong belief in equality. But Lauer brought the conversation back to the financial issues. Deen responded, “I want people to know who I am, and I’m so distressed that people I’ve never heard of are suddenly experts on who I am.” Without regard for how her words and actions made others feel, she continued, “And you know what distresses me the most, Matt? Their words are being given weight.”

Lauer pointed at that, in her lawsuit deposition, she was asked, “Was using the N-word in telling a joke hurtful?” Deen answered, “I don’t know. Most jokes are about Jewish people, rednecks and black folks… I didn’t make up the jokes. They usually target, though, a group… I can’t, myself, determine what offends another person.” That statement speaks loudly to her fundamental lack of insight and judgment.

But Deen did apologize during this 13-minute exchange and teared-up while she discussed her ethics by telling a story about her grandson. She should have stopped there. In what seemed to be a planned message point relating the New Testament idiom of “Let him who is without sin, cast the first stone,” Paula Deen had a sad and disturbing meltdown. She blurted, "Pick up that stone and throw it so hard... that it kills me."

Clearly, her performance on the TODAY show did more harm than good. Before the interview, two companies dropped her. After the show aired, it appeared her other business partners couldn’t distance themselves quickly enough. To be clear, I’m not congratulating these companies. They didn’t make their decisions out of a high-minded sense of ethics; they simply didn’t want to risk losing sales due to the fallout from this current controversy.

Remember, not only did Deen undermine her sweet, folksy brand with her slavery comment last year, but she also seemingly waited years to come out as a diabetic until she could sell more books and close an endorsement deal with the health care company and insulin maker Novo Nordisk. With all the evidence, she appears less "down home" and more like a calculating opportunist.

Looking back, Deen and her public relations counsel should have anticipated the potential public reaction to her racial slur, and taken more care in crafting a less selfish response. Looking ahead, she must decide whether to retreat, circle the wagons and speak only to her die-hard fan base, or overtly attempt to repair relationships and reengage with a wider audience. Paula, choose the latter and show us how you’ll do better.

Between blog posts, I invite you to follow me on Twitter @pauloestreicher.

Do the Facts Matter?

Of Course They Do, Of Course They Don't
We receive, provide and use facts all the time. Facts inform our choices. Facts support our points of view. Facts help us find new facts.

Yet we see that facts matter little when it comes to risk and behavior. People can recite the facts but they smoke cigarettes, overeat, abuse drugs, don’t exercise, don’t take their medicine, and don’t wear motorcycle or bicycle helmets.

There are other circumstances where people just refuse to acknowledge a fact as fact. Have you noticed that some arguments are never won despite having solid, unassailable facts? If the facts don’t fit the person’s worldview or “frame,” as the cognitive linguist George Lakoff terms it, the facts bounce off like bullets shot at Superman’s chest. Your opponent deflects all the data while you get blue in the face.

Certainly there are internal and external forces at play. There may be inertia: “That’s the way we’ve always done things.” There may be no consequences: “Who’s going to notice, who’s going to care?” We may feel powerless: “I don’t have the resources, I don’t have the access.”

Still, we pump out what we think are compelling facts in the hope of persuading people to take some sort of desired action. That’s what prompted me to write this entry.

Another public health alarm was sounded this week with the release of a survey that said very nearly everyone (83 percent) at risk for type 2 diabetes in the US is not getting a simple blood glucose test or taking the appropriate actions as a result of their test. This joint effort between The National Changing Diabetes(R) Program, sponsored by Novo Nordisk, and Fleishman-Hillard points to some special concerns in Hispanic and African American populations. “Fifty six percent of Hispanics should be tested and 59 percent of African Americans are at risk for diabetes and should talk to their doctor about being tested.”

Dana Haza, senior director, National Changing Diabetes Program (NCDP), said, “This study clearly demonstrates the need for greater education and awareness, especially among people who are at risk.” And Martha Boudreau, president Mid-Atlantic, Fleishman-Hillard, added, “In working with our National Diabetes Goal partners to release this information and help create awareness about type 2 diabetes, we hope it will serve as a call to action for at-risk Americans to get tested and respond accordingly."

The NCDP is a very worthwhile initiative, don’t get me wrong. But if facts were all that mattered, we’d be done. Insight alone does not produce change. Those who came after Freud quickly discovered this truism. Indeed, a whole new genre of psychotherapy (cognitive) came to life based on the knowledge that knowledge doesn't bring change.

It’s the desire to change that brings change. To the at-risk person we must ask: “Why don’t you care, what don’t you understand, who might help you, what resources do you need, can you imagine what your future would look like if you changed?” Gaining these insights will help us place more effective calls for those desired actions.