Abstract
Apologies are often used strategically in the crisis communication of an individual or an organization. In March 2006, highly celebrated Danish handball coach, Anja Andersen, withdrew her team in the midst of a match watched by a large number of spectators. The incident created immediate consternation, not only among sports officials, but also in the Danish media, representing a serious threat to the image of both the handball coach and her club. The following day, Anja Andersen apologized in public on television, but without evoking unambiguous forgiveness from all parties involved. This article examines how and why the Danish handball coach did not succeed in performing a correct and effective apology applying and testing Keith Michael Hearit’s theory of crisis management by apology, and especially his communication ethic or apologetic ethics which deals with crisis communication after an (alleged) wrongdoing.
Highlights
On March 5, 2006, Danish female handball team Slagelse plays an important match against their rivals from Aalborg DH
We shall apply and test his theory of crisis management by apology, and especially his communication ethic or apologetic ethics elaborated for how an individual or an organization should communicate after an wrongdoing, in order to find an answer to the question: Why did the apology of Anja Andersen not succeed in producing forgiveness?
An apology is first and foremost a “speech act” (Tavuchis 1991: 22), that is, a piece of verbal communication, and like all kinds of communication it has a dyadic structure or is the result of an interaction between two actors: the offender and the offended (Tavuchis 1991: 46). This dyadic structure or interaction can neither be reduced nor augmented without causing a radical transformation of the very nature of an apology. Departing from this understanding of the apology as a specific type of social exchange, Tavuchis has established a small typology of apologies based on the number of individuals included in the units of interaction
Summary
On March 5, 2006, Danish female handball team Slagelse plays an important match against their rivals from Aalborg DH. Anja Andersen gives a press conference seconded by the chief communication officer of the club, Henrik Madsen. During this press conference, the Danish handball coach apologizes explicitly for the course of events and her wrongdoing, but the media coverage of the day does not seem to agree about the sincerity of her apology. The aim of this article is to examine how and why Anja Andersen did not succeed in offering an apology that could produce immediate forgiveness from all parties hereby stopping the negative media coverage caused by the unfortunate handball match. We shall apply and test his theory of crisis management by apology, and especially his communication ethic or apologetic ethics elaborated for how an individual or an organization should communicate (apologize) after an (alleged) wrongdoing, in order to find an answer to the question: Why did the apology of Anja Andersen not succeed in producing forgiveness?
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: HERMES - Journal of Language and Communication in Business
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
