Reader’s guide on why newspapers struggle to say, ‘Sorry, we goofed’

Central Bank Governor Patrick Njoroge called to complain about a story, “CBK boss loses bid to testify in bank suit.”

Realising the story was inaccurate, the Daily Nation then published a “correction and apology” on page 2 in the following day’s paper. The offending story had appeared among the top three on page 25, the first page of the Business section.

Dr Njoroge was dissatisfied with the “puny correction and apology”. So he moved to the Complaints Commission of the Media Council of Kenya seeking orders for a suitable and fitting apology.

The commission, in its judgment of August 23, 2022, acknowledged that the Nation, on its own motion, promptly published the apology. However, it agreed with Dr Njoroge that the apology, which didn’t even include his picture, was inadequate.

This case, Dr Patrick Njoroge v Nation Media Group, is instructive on why newspapers struggle to apologise for stories that are inaccurate and defamatory or violate privacy. The case is likely to have precedential value.

The commission came up with a full interpretation of what constitutes a sufficient apology. Other courts have not gone beyond simple, short and largely unhelpful descriptions. Examples: “Unconditional apology”, “appropriate apology” and “suitably worded apology”.

“Was the Nation apology sufficient?” the commission asks in its judgment. “Put differently, were the ingredients for the glue the right ones and was the mixture well measured for the glue to hold? We draw our discussion from Lynn Johnson, an insightful Canadian cartoonist and creator of For Better or Worse, who wrote metaphorically that ‘an apology is a superglue of life. It can repair just about anything’.

“If we follow Johnson’s metaphor above, we note that even though an apology can be a powerful life tool, things can go wrong. If the ingredients of the glue are not properly measured and mixed, it does not work; and even if it does work, often the pieces do not always fit together. It is our considered view that suitability of an apology in the media can broadly be assessed using three limbs—the content of the apology, the promptness of the apology and the prominence of the apology compared to the prominence of the offending article.”

The commission also drew from the work of law professor Daniel Shuman, who holds that “minimally, to be meaningful, an apology must express regret for the occurrence of a harmful event and acknowledge responsibility for it.”

Core elements of an apology

It also cited Nicholas Tavuchis’s book, Mea Culpa: A Sociology of Apology and Reconciliation, which holds that an effective and authentic apology requires a combination of some of the seven core elements of an apology—recognition, remorse, responsibility, repentance, reasons, reparation or restitution and reform. It also relied on Christina Bedei’s advice: When a newspaper gets something wrong it ought to explain to the readers and apologise as a natural part of the relationship between the reporter/publication and the audience.

Although the commission concluded that the Nation apology was insufficient, it didn’t order a second one because of the principle of proportionality. But it directed the Nation to publish a statement of its adjudication, with Dr Njoroge’s picture, name and title.

This case comes against the backdrop of a dark secret: Newspapers struggle to say, “We’re sorry, we made a mistake.” They rarely use expressions such as “We made a mistake”, “We messed up” or “We made a blunder”. Why? Because to apologise openly is likely to be interpreted as admitting liability, and that may have costly legal consequences. This was demonstrated in Honourable Jakoyo Midiwo v Kenya Times Media Trust Ltd & Another. Justice Kihara Kariuki found the Sunday Times had admitted liability in its apology.

Editors, too, are human; they may feel they have to keep up appearances as professionals who do not make mistakes. That is why newspapers struggle to apologise. Still, they don’t have a choice: They must correct errors and apologise when necessary.

Uncorrected errors erode the credibility of a newspaper, attract litigation and damage relationships. Corrections and apologies restore credibility and repair damaged relationships. Ironically, corrections and apologies help to get a more favourable judgment if the newspaper is sued or in avoiding litigation altogether.

The Public Editor is an independent news ombudsman who handles readers’ complaints on editorial matters including accuracy and journalistic standards. Email: [email protected]. Call or text 0721989264