Thursday, December 17, 2009

Why no one should apologize for the Stephen Harper photoshop.

Yes, you read that right -- no one should bother apologizing for the recent Stephen Harper photoshop fiasco, for the simple reason that it would be wasted breath and would change nothing. Let me explain.

First, let's all understand that the photo of Stephen Harper superimposed on Lee Harvey Oswald was wrong. It was stupid, it was childish and it was in unbelievably poor taste. No one can possibly deny any of that. And yet ... and yet ... anyone demanding an apology for it should be told to go suck eggs.

There's only one reason you ever apologize to anyone. That's because you realize you did something grossly unacceptable, and you want to make things right. You want to smooth things over, you want to patch things up, you want to make it all good again, however you want to phrase it. But it's clear what the point is here -- that your basic dialogue should go something like this:

"You did something really fucking stupid and I'm pissed!"
"You're right, it was unacceptable and I apologize for it."
"All right, then, we're good."

Aha -- you see the very last part of what happened above? The acceptance of the apology, that's what happened. Because without that acceptance, an apology is just wasted oxygen.

So let's see how this scenario plays out over at Steve Janke's, where Steve reproduces a portion of Jeff Jedras' prose during which Jedras makes it abundantly clear that what happened is not even remotely acceptable:

* The photo was unacceptable, way beyond good taste, and should never have gone online.
* Clearly, the screening process failed and corrective action should (and has, I understand) been taken.
* It's important to remember this was user-generated content in a contest, and wasn't created y the party.
* The photo was taken down and an apology was made, that's the appropriate response.

Now, to normal and sane people, the above would seem to nicely summarize the appropriate response to what happened:

  • It was wrong.

  • It was not an official act of the Liberal Party.

  • Action has been taken.

  • We're sorry.

Frankly, it's hard to imagine how much more complete this could be. And yet, here's Janke's jaw-dropping response:

There is no admission of the root cause of the problem.

Well, fuck you, Steve. The Canadian Idiotsphere has been baying with absolute bloodlust for an apology for this, Jeff Jedras provides precisely that, and your response is to tell him to piss off.

why no one should be apologizing for this. Because it would make no difference whatsoever. The Idiotsphere has their distraction and no apology imaginable is going to make the slightest difference, with Steve Janke being a better example of that than I could have imagined in my wildest dreams.

If the Idiotsphere has no interest in acknowledging or accepting a heartfelt apology, they should stop demanding one. And, frankly, sane people should stop offering one. It's a waste of time. Steve Janke has made that abundantly clear.


Ti-Guy said...

Quick...Someone photoshop a paper hole on Stephen Wanke's HUMONGOUS forehead.

Anonymous said...

Supply the his picture, I'll gladly photoshop it...

Ti-Guy said...

There's one with Wanke, Rondee Adamson and Conrad Black somewhere at My Blahg. Plenty of paper holes to put there, that's for sure. I'll see if I can find it

Anyway...OMG! You have to listen to the segment with Jeff Jedras on Rob Breakenridge's radio show here. Wanke has a full, psychotic meltdown the likes of which I don't believe I've ever witnessed. He's shrill, hysterical, petulant, he interrupts... You HAVE to listen to it.

I'm saving the clip for future reference.

deBeauxOs said...

"There is no admission of the root cause of the problem."

What? That remark is unconscionably fatuous.

Then I read Janke's whole blogpost. That is MASSIVE intellectual dishonesty of stunning breadth. If Janke and other ReformaTory sycophants believe that crap, they're fundamentally deranged.

CC said...

Your point being ... ?

Ti-Guy said...

That is MASSIVE intellectual dishonesty of stunning breadth.

It might be more psychological than that. Given what we know about the Right, how morally and ethically bankrupt and repulsive it is, how it engages in eliminationist rhetoric and approves of and conducts assassinations, how it has no real objections to torturing its adversaries, this might be just them thinking that other people probably do have cause to wish them dead.

I'll be upfront and say I do quite often, in a "deliver us from evil" kind of way (although I hold out hope for redemption). But I know I live in civilisation and am bound by the rule of law and set of values that would never permit to ever act on those feelings, so I'm not overly bothered by them. The Right, however, is not so constrained and it's there where their fear, terror and generally hysteria is rooted.

Anonymous said...

You have to listen to the segment with Jeff Jedras on Rob Breakenridge's radio show

"Those were papers holes... we never wanted anyone to die"...

"Nobody was supposed to die"...

"Boo hoo grow up, grow a pair"..

"I'm simple that way" (yes he is).

"It's the faceless mob of Liberals that did it"

Steve needs a good nad kicking.
Given that the bullet holes around Dion are not bullet holes according to thejankernator, one wonders who is not clever enough to understand metaphors....

Ti-Guy said...

Yeah, the "boo hoo hoo" was a nice decoration on Janke's arabesque of lunacy.

Get the straight jackets. Time to send ol' Wanke to the nut hatch.

Bismark said...

arabesque of lunacy...

Nice one. :)

Lenny said...

Janke: "...the pain and blood and terror..."

Is he talking about a photoshopped image or the treatment of Afghan detainees? Click the link to find out!

liberal supporter said...

The only physical assault based jokes that are generally passable are the ones with knives sticking out of someone's back. Said knives should look like dining room cutlery and not hunting knives or bayonets. Plus the recipient of said knives would be portrayed still walking (or running away) though wincing.