Wednesday, 10 February 2010

Note to Tony Veitch

This is what a proper apology looks like:
...I now wish to apologise publicly to her and her family for my behaviour in Fiji that night.

It was unacceptable and in no way provoked by her or any other person.

The day after I genuinely tried to express my sincere regret to her for my actions. I can understand how upset she was.

I hope our meeting and the apology will bring closure to her and her family over an incident of which I am truly remorseful.

I have nothing further to add to this statement.
No ifs, no buts, no blaming the victim, no excuses. Just fronting up.

Well done Robin Brooke*. Hopefully his remorse will serve as a good example to others to just not do this crap in the first place.

* And as a massive disliker of the Auckland rugby team I never thought I would write those words.


Boganette said...

Call me cynical but I think his PR company is just better at their job than Veitch's.

Craig Ranapia said...

You're cynical. :) But if 'doing a better job' means not resorting to character assassination of your victim and a tsunami of weasel-worded passive voice denial, then it's a very good day at the office indeed.

Brett Dale said...

Do you really think Brooke is sorry??

Do you rerally think the only time he has done something like this, is the time he got caught and it weas made public?

Boganette is rigtht, that was PR, and the media ate it up.

Boganette said...

:) Spot on Craig and well-said! I think it's a very good apology - and certainly the right way to apologise but whether or not it's sincere was essentially what I was getting at. I mean it's PR spin - but hey he might mean it. I hope he does but I doubt it.

Brett Dale said...

Stuff has an item about the PR firm who handles Robin Brooke.

Brett Dale said...

Opps forgot the link.

Violet said...

yep I vote for PR brilliance too.

Grace Dalley said...

Brooke's was a good apology, and let's hope his remorse is genuine.

If it isn't, that's between him and his conscience.

Hugh said...

Even if it's not sincere, at least it doesn't introduce any harmful or retrograde ideas into the public dialogue.

I mean, it'd be nice if he was genuinely repentant, but ultimately it's impossible to know. If he acts in a way that's identical to somebody who is genuinely repentant, that's really the best any commentary can aspire to.

So if this is a result of good PR, maybe this is an instance when good PR is, well, good.

Erin said...

It would have been more sincere if he'd issued the apology about 6 weeks ago (or however long it's been since the allegation was made).

Julie said...

Could it have been better, faster? Yes, probably. But it's still better than Veitch and others have managed to do and for that reason I don't think Brooke (and/or his PR agency) deserve a gold star, but they do perhaps deserve a small bronze one.

The story first broke in the Herald on 9th January, and the event itself took place on New Year's Eve.