If you actually read the article, I'm pretty sure you'll find the words "we're sorry" in there.
Interesting to me that all it takes to count as an apology to some is the words 'we're sorry'.
I hope to find similar discussion(s) where an HN user practiced his hobby of rewriting corporate apologies. Also nice to have another example where initial response can be completely tone deaf with little consequence.
All you have to do is drop the word "sorry", it doesn't matter if the apology actually addressed any of the concerns that were raised.
FB was sorry for being "unclear". Mozilla is sorry for "the confusion" and for "letting down members of [the] community".
The headlines will read "[Company] apologizes for [event that triggered criticism]" and everyone will carry on as if the apology directly addressed that event. The lawyers and shareholders will breathe a sigh of relief, and the matter will soon be forgotten.
From what you've said it doesn't sound like anyone at Mozilla (specifically the Chief Marketing Officer representing the company) apologized for doing anything wrong. "letting down" comes closest for sure and may be enough for most.
swanson: My hobby: role-playing how I would respond as the CEO if my company was getting skewered on HN. Here is my version!
Also, https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3523763
abbasmehdi: Proper apologies have three parts: 1) What I did was wrong. 2) I’m sorry that I hurt you. 3) How do I make it better? It’s the third part that people tend to forget…. Apologize when you screw up and focus on other people, not on yourself.
(Couldn't find the exact YouTube timecode; https://teamrich.wordpress.com/2007/10/20/pausch-last-lectur... )
>anon808: The most import part of that apology formula is missing, actually meaning it. Also if the answer to #3 is obvious (ie stop doing what your apologizing for) then one shouldn't have to ask.