Not everyone who says “I’m sorry” is in a position to make things right.
There’s a particular kind of discomfort that settles in when someone apologizes “on behalf” of another. A boss apologizing for an employee’s mistake. A parent apologizing for their child’s behavior. A politician apologizing for a country’s past sins. Sometimes, these apologies feel right and necessary. Other times, they feel hollow—or even wrong.
Why?
Because of a question we don’t often ask out loud, but deeply feel:
Do you have the moral standing to apologize for this?
In I Was Wrong: The Meanings of Apologies, philosopher Nick Smith devotes a section to this often-overlooked concept: standing—the idea that not all people are equally qualified to apologize for a specific harm. According to Smith, even the most eloquent, heartfelt apology can ring false if the wrong person is delivering it.
What Is Standing—and Why Does It Matter?
To have standing in the context of apology means that you are in a position to meaningfully take responsibility for the harm that was caused. It means you were either the wrongdoer, or closely connected in a way that grants you legitimate authority to speak on behalf of those who were.
Without this connection, even the sincerest apology can feel performative.
For example:
- If your partner cheats and their sibling apologizes on their behalf, does that mean anything to you?
- If a company CEO apologizes for systemic abuse, but denies personal knowledge or involvement, does it carry moral weight?
- If someone says “I’m sorry for what happened to you,” but had nothing to do with it—are they apologizing, or just expressing sympathy?
These aren’t just semantic questions. They touch the very core of what makes an apology meaningful.
When We Want the Right Person to Speak
When we’ve been hurt, we don’t just want an apology. We want the right person to apologize.
We want the one who broke the promise, told the lie, crossed the boundary, or failed to protect us. Not their assistant. Not their spokesperson. Not their public relations team.
Because apologies are not just about hearing regret—they’re about seeing accountability. And when the wrong person apologizes, that sense of moral closure is lost.
As Smith puts it, the person offering the apology must have moral authority over the harm—otherwise, the gesture can come across as hollow, deflective, or even offensive.
Delegated Apologies: Do They Ever Work?
There are times when someone genuinely can’t speak for themselves—because they’re unavailable, incapacitated, or no longer alive. In such cases, delegated apologies can serve as a form of proxy accountability, especially when backed by institutional reform or collective redress.
But for them to feel sincere, three things usually need to happen:
- The speaker must acknowledge their distance from the harm.
- They must express moral solidarity with those who were harmed.
- They must be clear about what they can and cannot promise.
For example:
“I did not commit these acts myself, but I speak today with the responsibility of someone entrusted with this institution’s legacy. We failed you. And I apologize for that failure.”
That’s not pretending. That’s standing up while also knowing your place.
The Dangers of Misused Standing
Smith warns of a subtle danger when standing is misused—particularly in politics and public relations. Sometimes, an organization will issue an apology through a leader with no real connection to the wrongdoing, hoping that the words alone will smooth over scandal or silence outrage.
But when someone with no standing speaks as if they carry moral authority, it can feel manipulative. It can feel like they’re using the apology as a shield—not to reckon with the harm, but to control the narrative or protect others from consequences.
In those moments, what should be a sacred exchange of accountability becomes a performance. And the victims often walk away feeling unheard, again.
Who Should Speak? A Test for Real Apology
Smith invites us to ask: Who is in the best position to own this harm?
That’s the person who should apologize.
If someone else speaks, they should name their distance and limitations clearly.
And if the person who should apologize refuses to, or disappears behind others—they’re not just dodging words. They’re dodging moral growth.
When You Have the Standing—And When You Don’t
This idea also matters in everyday life. Sometimes we step in too quickly, apologizing for someone we love, hoping to make things better. “She didn’t mean it.” “He’s sorry, he just doesn’t know how to say it.”
But in doing that, we might unintentionally rob them of the chance to take real ownership—and rob the other person of the justice they deserve.
If you caused harm, you have standing. Use it with courage.
If you didn’t cause harm, your role may be to support—not to speak over.