<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: Nothing to see here. Ignore the content, ignore the tone.	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://sorrywatch.com/nothing-to-see-here-ignore-the-content-ignore-the-tone/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://sorrywatch.com/nothing-to-see-here-ignore-the-content-ignore-the-tone/</link>
	<description>Analyzing apologies in the news, media, history and literature. We condemn the bad and exalt the good.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Aug 2020 03:04:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Andrea T.		</title>
		<link>https://sorrywatch.com/nothing-to-see-here-ignore-the-content-ignore-the-tone/#comment-195219</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Andrea T.]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2016 23:38:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://sorrywatch.com/?p=4238#comment-195219</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[First read, it worked up to the mudslinging section. 
But after a reread it&#039;s true...she isn&#039;t specific about why these comments are hateful and hurtful. If you are apologizing for offending people--even if the act itself was 20 years ago--you need to show that you understand what was offensive (hateful and hurtful) about what you said or what you did.
This was a squandered opportunity to show how she&#039;s &quot;evolved&quot;.
Another word I guess we all hate now?]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First read, it worked up to the mudslinging section.<br />
But after a reread it&#8217;s true&#8230;she isn&#8217;t specific about why these comments are hateful and hurtful. If you are apologizing for offending people&#8211;even if the act itself was 20 years ago&#8211;you need to show that you understand what was offensive (hateful and hurtful) about what you said or what you did.<br />
This was a squandered opportunity to show how she&#8217;s &#8220;evolved&#8221;.<br />
Another word I guess we all hate now?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: smc		</title>
		<link>https://sorrywatch.com/nothing-to-see-here-ignore-the-content-ignore-the-tone/#comment-195204</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[smc]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2016 16:19:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://sorrywatch.com/?p=4238#comment-195204</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[What she wrote so long ago, is mostly relevant in terms of what she says about it now. Her current statement is indeed extremely vague. It would be perfectly reasonable for her to disavow statements made that long ago, and in a time when your every word was not flying around on the internet.

But if she wishes to disavow those statements, she has to do better than just saying her views have changed on things in general, and also leaving us to wonder if her temperament has changed in the intervening time. Presumably it has, most people mature during that time period. But unless she makes some specific statements about what she said, and does it without acting immature, and self-righteous, about it, her &quot;apology&quot; rings false.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What she wrote so long ago, is mostly relevant in terms of what she says about it now. Her current statement is indeed extremely vague. It would be perfectly reasonable for her to disavow statements made that long ago, and in a time when your every word was not flying around on the internet.</p>
<p>But if she wishes to disavow those statements, she has to do better than just saying her views have changed on things in general, and also leaving us to wonder if her temperament has changed in the intervening time. Presumably it has, most people mature during that time period. But unless she makes some specific statements about what she said, and does it without acting immature, and self-righteous, about it, her &#8220;apology&#8221; rings false.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: tanita		</title>
		<link>https://sorrywatch.com/nothing-to-see-here-ignore-the-content-ignore-the-tone/#comment-195196</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[tanita]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2016 14:04:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://sorrywatch.com/?p=4238#comment-195196</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Eew, this is ugly, and likely to get uglier -- especially in this election year. 

In trying to sweep everything neatly under the carpet it appears this woman is being overly vague and soft-soaping which opinions she held that were right or wrong, but I maintain that no one can take her uninformed collegiate babblings very seriously... on the other hand, now I sound like Gloria Steinham positing that today&#039;s girls are only wondering where the boys are. 

To clarify: Youth is not in and of itself a reason to ignore her past writing, but *time* is -- any of us, between forty and eighty, even, must have opinions which have changed, mustn&#039;t we? I don&#039;t know. I don&#039;t let her off the hook for having said something as a college student, but neither do I think her rantings shed much light on her current beliefs, which is something her constituents will have to understand thoroughly in order to vote for her.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Eew, this is ugly, and likely to get uglier &#8212; especially in this election year. </p>
<p>In trying to sweep everything neatly under the carpet it appears this woman is being overly vague and soft-soaping which opinions she held that were right or wrong, but I maintain that no one can take her uninformed collegiate babblings very seriously&#8230; on the other hand, now I sound like Gloria Steinham positing that today&#8217;s girls are only wondering where the boys are. </p>
<p>To clarify: Youth is not in and of itself a reason to ignore her past writing, but *time* is &#8212; any of us, between forty and eighty, even, must have opinions which have changed, mustn&#8217;t we? I don&#8217;t know. I don&#8217;t let her off the hook for having said something as a college student, but neither do I think her rantings shed much light on her current beliefs, which is something her constituents will have to understand thoroughly in order to vote for her.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
