OPINION | When brands use apologies casually, credibility is the real casualty

Food brands, fashion apps, gadget retailers, have all posted mock public apologies, on corporate letterheads and legalese, only to reveal a marketing punchline.

What began as a creative hack to grab attention has quickly become a gimmick. And like all gimmicks, it risks trivialising something that should be used with extraordinary care: the corporate apology. As this trend gains momentum across industries, it raises concerns not only about cultural dilution of what “sorry” means, but also about long-term trust and credibility - the very foundation that brands work decades to build.

The rise of the mock corporate apology

The format is instantly recognisable: a sombre headline: “Official Apology Statement”, “Unconditional Public Apology”, or “We Regret to Inform”. A block of text follows, styled like a legal communication. For a few seconds, the reader suspects a crisis: a product recall? A customer data breach? A regulatory failing?

Instead, the twist arrives: the brand is “very sorry” … for being too good, too irresistible, too helpful, or too addictive. Far from contrition, the post is usually a tongue-in-cheek boast. The kind of thing eager job aspirants say to recruiters when asked for their biggest weakness: “I am obsessed with perfection”.

It is built for the attention economy: a scroll-stopper, a prank on expectations, the kind of content that draws laughs, comments and shares. For social media managers, it is a dream format — easy to replicate, visually uniform, and instantly viral.

But therein lies the issue: it is also deeply unserious, especially when the language mimics genuine corporate apologies that are meant to address harm, responsibility and accountability.

To be fair, the format works in the short run. A cryptic apology sparks curiosity and triggers instant engagement. Screenshots circulate, speculation builds and hashtags trend. But this surge of attention comes at a cost.

When a creative device becomes a cliché

For now, even from a creative standpoint, the format is beginning to show fatigue.

The first few posts sparked amusement because of their novelty. But like most viral templates, once dozens of brands jump in, the originality evaporates and consumers begin to perceive it as formulaic. Overuse kills the surprise.

Marketing thrives on freshness, but an apology — even a joke version — is not supposed to be a template. When it becomes one, it loses power.

These apology posts often attempt to deliver a humblebrag - a disguised boast framed as modesty. But research in brand psychology suggests humblebrags usually backfire. Consumers can sense insincerity, and when humour is over-calculated, it weakens authenticity.

A brand saying, “Sorry we’re so amazing you can’t resist us” may get laughs, but it reduces its identity to that of a social-media trickster rather than a trustworthy institution.

More importantly, it shifts the brand’s voice from a position of responsibility to one of irreverence — fine for youth-led consumer brands and impulse products; but troublesome for categories like automobiles, electronics, housing, banking, healthcare and infrastructure where reliability is the ultimate currency.

As the trend spreads indiscriminately across serious and frivolous sectors, the disconnect becomes sharper.

First, it dilutes the seriousness of real apologies. When brands repeatedly “cry wolf,” audiences become desensitised. The word “sorry” stops signalling sincerity and instead becomes another marketing trope. This erosion is dangerous, especially in an age where companies routinely face scrutiny around data breaches, product safety, service failures or social missteps. When a brand actually needs to apologise, its earlier theatrics may undercut its credibility.

Second, consumers are becoming more discerning, and increasingly, more cynical. A brand that routinely deploys apology-teasers risks appearing manipulative or frivolous. Trust - painstakingly built over years - can be undermined by a perception that the brand treats serious language lightly for tactical advantage.

Third, overuse of this tactic reflects a broader issue in Indian marketing: the growing obsession with short term spikes in engagement over sustained brand equity. Brands are substituting long-term storytelling with quick dopamine hits. The apology trend is simply the latest expression of this short-termism.

Brands must evolve with culture, and playful formats are welcome. But not every creative idea needs to borrow the language of crisis and remorse.

A genuine apology carries social meaning - it recognises failure, acknowledges a mistake, accepts accountability, and sets the stage for rebuilding trust. It is inappropriate to dilute that meaning in the pursuit of engagement.

If everything becomes content, even responsibility becomes entertainment. That is a slippery slope.

Ultimately, the challenge for marketers is not to apologise more cleverly, but to communicate more responsibly. In a hyper-competitive attention economy, authenticity still wins. And that is something no brand ever needs to say “sorry” for.

(Lloyd Mathias is a Business Strategist and an Independent Director. He tweets on X as @LloydMathias.)

Views are personal and do not represent the stand of this publication.