Saying sorry in the 21st century : public apologies in a digital world

The public apology to the Forgotten Australians in late 2009 was, for many, the culmination of a long campaign for recognition and justice. The groundswell for this apology was built through a series of submissions which documented the systemic institutionalised abuse and neglect experienced by the Forgotten Australians that has resulted, for some, in life-long disadvantage and marginalisation. Interestingly it seems that rather than the official documents being the catalyst for change and prompting this public apology, it was more often the personal stories of the Forgotten Australians that resonated and over time drew out quite a torrent of support from the public leading up to, during and after the public apology, just as had been the case with the ‘Stolen Generation.’ Research suggests (cite) that the ethics of such national apologies only make sense if their personal stories are seen as a collective responsibility of society, and only carry weight if we understand and seek to Nationally address the trauma experienced by such victims. In the case of the Forgotten Australians, the National Library of Australia’s Forgotten Australians and Former Child Migrants Oral History Project and the National Museum’s Inside project demonstrate commitment to the digitisation of the Forgotten Australians’ stories in order to promote a better public understanding of their experiences, and institutionally (and therefore formally) value them with renewed social importance. Our project builds on this work not by making or collecting more stories, but by examining the role of the internet and digital technologies used in the production and dissemination of individuals’ stories that have already been created during the period of time between the tabling of the senate inquiry, Children in Institutional Care (1999 or 2003?) and a formal National apology being delivered in Federal Parliament by PM Kevin Rudd (9 Nov, 2009?). This timeframe also represents the emergent first decade of Internet use by Australians, including the rapid easily accessible digital technologies and social media tools that were at our disposal, along with the promises the technology claimed to offer — that is that more people would benefit from the social connections these technologies allegedly were giving us.

Non-apologies and prolonged silences in post-conflict settings: The case of post-colonial Cyprus

Despite the growing use of apologies in post-conflict settings, cases of non-apology remain unaddressed and continue to puzzle scholars. This article focuses on the absence of apology by non-state and anti-state actors by examining the case of the Cypriot armed group EOKA, which has refused to offer an apology to the civilian victims of its ‘anti-colonial’ struggle (1955–1959). Using field data and parliamentary debates, and drawing on comparisons, this article analyses the factors that contributed to a lack of apology. It is argued that the inherited timelessness of Greek nationalism, and the impression of a perpetual need for defence, set up textbook conditions for the development of a hegemonic discourse and prevented an apology for human rights violations.

Apologies

UANL

Aboriginal and non-aboriginal Australia : the dilemma of apologies, forgiveness, and reconciliation

This article presents a qualitative study of the indigenous Australian perspective on reconciliation with nonindigenous Australia, with a focus on the role of an apology for the oppression and violence perpetrated by nonindigenous Australians, and forgiveness on the part of indigenous Australians. A brief historical analysis of the relationship between Aborigines and waves of settlers is presented to demonstrate the extent of the wrong that was perpetrated against Aborigines and the need for social as well as practical reconciliation in the current context. It is argued that negotiated forgiveness is a concept that is pertinent to the discussion of reconciliation, because it requires a dialogue between the parties and ultimately for the wrongdoer to accept accountability and responsibility for offending actions, thereby opening the door for forgiveness and, ultimately, possible reconciliation. It is suggested that a first step in the required reconciliation dialogue is an apology, but the issue of who should give and receive an apology is a complex one. The issue of who should forgive and who should be forgiven is shown to be similarly complex. Qualitative analysis of interview data from 10 participants indicated that at this point in time, forgiveness might not be salient to the indigenous population, whose primary focus is more on the matter of an apology. This suggests that negotiated forgiveness and reconciliation will remain elusive goals until the matter of an apology is resolved.

Making meaning from collective apologies : Australia's apology to its indigenous peoples

This article considers the meaning of intergroup apologies for their recipients. Our research examined Indigenous people’s responses to the 2008 Australian apology to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples forcibly removed from their families under previous governments (the Stolen Generations). We interviewed Indigenous men (n=10) and women (n=22) about their attitudes toward the apology and forgiveness. To cover the breadth of Indigenous responses to the Australian apology, we sought out participants from diverse geographic, cultural, and occupational contexts across Australia. After pooling the transcripts and entering them into NVivo, we identified key concepts and themes. Participants expressed positive, negative, and mixed views toward the apology and forgiveness. A dominant theme emerged as participants indicated that for the apology to be truly meaningful, there needed to be action commensurate with the emotion of the apology. Though participants indicated that the apology promoted reconciliation, this was not true for forgiveness. We conclude by discussing implications of these findings for theoretical models of intergroup apology.

[Watson's] Apologies for Christianity and the Bible; Jenyns's View of the internal evidence of the Christian religion;West's Observations on the resurrection of Christ,and Lyttelton, On the conversion and apostleship of St.Paul.

Added engraved title-page.

The progress of Puseyism; a review of the apologies of Dr. Seabury and Mr. Haight,

Mode of access: Internet.

Developing ethical identities in young offenders through restorative justice practice in Australia

Restorative justice is firmly established in Australian juvenile justice. While the official language used to describe restorative initiatives varies across states and territories, the most common form is a meeting or conference between young offenders and their victims (most commonly known as a family group or youth justice conference). During the past decade, an impressive amount of empirical research has examined how the restorative justice process affects offenders, victims and other participants (such as supporters for young offenders and victims). Results from this line of research are remarkably consistent and show that participants generally regard restorative conferences as procedurally fair and that they are satisfied with the outcomes (eg what young offenders agree to do to make up for their offending behaviour, such as offer a sincere apology or perform work for the victim or the community). What is less common, however, is the perception among participants that restorative conferences achieve the key aim of restoration.By ‘restoration’ we refer to encounters where ‘offenders apologise, their apologies are accepted, victims offer forgiveness,and conferences conclude with a feeling of mutual good will’.

Defences in medical negligence : to what extent has tort law reform in Australia limited the liability of health professionals?

Tort law reform has resulted in legislation being passed by all Australian jurisdictions in the past decade implementing the recommendations contained in the Ipp Report. The report was in response to a perceived crisis in medical indemnity insurance. The objective was to restrict and limit liability in negligence actions. This paper will consider to what extent the reforms have impacted on the liability of health professionals in medical negligence actions. The reversal of the onus of proof through the obvious risk sections has attempted to extend the scope of the defence of voluntary assumption of risk. There is no liability for the materialisation of an inherent risk. Presumptions and mandatory reductions for contributory negligence have attempted to reduce the liability of defendants. It is now possible for reductions of 100% for contributory negligence. Apologies can be made with no admission of legal liability to encourage them being made and thereby reduce the number of actions being commenced. The peer acceptance defence has been introduced and enacted by legislation. There is protection for good samaritans even though the Ipp Report recommended against such protection. Limitation periods have been amended. Provisions relating to mental harm have been introduced re-instating the requirement of normal fortitude and direct perception. After an analysis of the legislation, it will be argued in this paper that while there has been some limitation and restriction, courts have generally interpreted the civil liability reforms in compliance with the common law. It has been the impact of statutory limits on the assessment of damages which has limited the liability of health professionals in medical negligence actions.

Digital technology and public apology : responses by Indigenous Australians to a government saying sorry

Australia has had two recent public apologies, one to the ‘ Stolen Generation’ of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Australians and the second to the ‘Forgotten Australians' – people who had been removed from their parents as children and institutionalized. Both acts occurred in time when there was no Internet and peoples’ stories took years to collect and decades for their weight to carry the public momentum required to gain a public apology. Now, in a digital age, the reports and the testimonies held within them are available for all to read on the Internet. We all now know what happened and formal public apologies ensued. Both public apologies also draw attention to an emerging intersection between digital technologies, personal historical stories and public apology. Research has identified the potential of digital narrative, such as digital storytelling3 and videoed oral histories to assist in the production of digital narratives that can help to present the multiple voices and viewpoints of those affected by these subjects co-creatively (Burgess et al, pp.152-153). Not all Australians however have access or the skills to use digital tools so as to benefit from these technologies ⎯ especially Indigenous Australians. While the Federal Government is committed to helping Australians enjoy digital confidence and digital media literacy skills, experience inclusive digital participation and benefit through online engagement (Department of Broadband, communications and the Digital Economy, 2009) there are many initiatives that can also be undertaken locally by State funded institutions, such as libraries to assist. This paper highlights the outcomes of recent empirical projects undertaken at the State Library of Queensland (SLQ) in particular focusing on digital initiatives in Family History practices by Indigenous users, and a digital story project in response to the public apology to the Stolen Generation instigated by SLQ.

Justino presenta la divinidad de Cristo ante judíos y paganos

Resumen: El autor nos ofrece una rápida visión de la Trinidad en Justino, fruto de una larga investigación. Resume primero el camino del Diálogo, donde Justino atribuye las teofanías del Antiguo Testamento al Logos. Este Dios es numéricamente distinto del Padre Creador del universo, pero está por debajo de él. En las Apologías, en cambio, se confronta con el paganismo y el platonismo: ubica al Logos en el segundo lugar, y al Espíritu en el Tercero. El Hijo, unigénito, es engendrado por el Padre antes de las creaturas, sin dividirlo, sino como un fuego enciende a otro fuego. El Padre todo lo hace por medio de él. Poco alude a la actividad propia del Espíritu profético. Estos dos caminos confluyen en una cierta inferioridad del Hijo respecto al Padre, la que es típica de diversos Padres prenicenos. Los perversos demonios han perseguido a todos los que, como Sócrates, han vivido según el Logos. Platón copió a Moisés sin entenderlo del todo. La cruz del Hijo es cósmica. Jesús es el maestro crucificado