In my quest and that of my compatriot-in-arms Nell Minow to follow the world of public apologies as a core feature of our International Apology Association, I tend to post examples of when public figures get the apology wrong, and explain why.  I tend to do this far, far more often than not because -- most public apologists seem to get it wrong far, far more often than not.

Benedict Cumberbatch got it right. 

I have a feeling that most people would like to think that Benedict Cumberbatch would get a public apology right.  So, it's comforting to know that it's so.

I also think most people would be surprised to find that Benedict Cumberbatch would say something that required a public apology, so it's valuable to know that his gaff came in the middle of him being admirable about saying something right -- which may well be why he got his apology so right -- he just made an ill-thought gaff in doing so.

He was talking about the lack of diversity for actors in films. and noted that, "a lot of my friends have had more opportunities here [in the U.S.] than in the U.K., and that's something that needs to change. Something's gone wrong. We're not representative enough in our culture of different races, and that really does need to step up apace."

Unfortunately, in getting into this issue he stumbled a bit in his phrasing and used the word "colored."  Public comment, most notably an anti-racism charity in England, noted that Mr. Cumberbatch's heart was in the right place and was commendable, but regretted him "inadvertently" highlighting the issue due to the "evolution of language."

Cumberbatch didn't double-down.  He didn't use the "if I offended anyone" defense.  He didn't leave it at "you know what I meant."  And he didn't try to diminish it as a small gaffe -- which it was.  Instead...he apologized.

"I'm devastated to have caused offense by using this outmoded terminology. I offer my sincere apologies. I make no excuse for my being an idiot and know the damage is done. I can only hope this incident will highlight the need for correct usage of terminology that is accurate and inoffensive. The most shaming aspect of this for me is that I was talking about racial inequality in the performing arts in the U.K. and the need for rapid improvements in our industry when I used the term. 

"I feel the complete fool I am and while I am sorry to have offended people and to learn from my mistakes in such a public manner please be assured I have. I apologize again to anyone who I offended for this thoughtless use of inappropriate language about an issue which affects friends of mine and which I care about deeply." 

That's how it's done.  

It's elementary.

You can tell when the dittohead memo has gone out from GOP headquarters, because not only do so many on the far right start making the same point, but you see it repeated and repeated and endlessly repeated in tweets flying across your screen.

In this case, the current GOP Tweet Theme of the Week is, "So, Obama can find time to meet w/ YouTube video star who puts peanuts up her nose, but not meet Israel pres Netanyahu."

It's one of those times I oh-so dearly wish that Twitter allowed more than 140 characters.  Because no meaningful response in so few words does it justice.  But 140 characters is the limit, so I have left my Twitter feed un-replied.

Same, too, when the GOP Tweet Theme of the Week just before it was, "So, Obama can't find time to go to France to protest terror and honor the dead."

("Finding the time" is apparently a really big deal to the far right.)

Happily, though, I get more than 140 characters on these pages.  And often take full advantage of that quirk of fate, as readers here have long-since discovered...  So, just look at this response below as a 140-character tweet, expanded magically through use of iBob Technology.

Last week, on January 17, the headline of the Los Angeles Times was "Heat Hits New High", with the sub-head, "2014 was the warmest year ever measured, confirming a trend."

The article by reporter Geoffrey Moran began --

"The average surface temperature on Earth was higher in 2014 than at any time since scientists began taking detailed measurements 135 years ago.

"The 1.4-degree Fahrenheit rise since 1880 confirms long-term warming patterns and renewed alarm about changes that could flood coasts, provoke more severe storms and dry out croplands around the globe, climate experts at NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration said Friday."

The accompanying chart showed that the 10 hottest days ever recorded since weather has been charted have all occurred in the last 16 years.

That Los Angeles Times front page story was admittedly a long time in the past -- a whopping nine days ago.  On the West Coast.

On the East Coast, the story today -- a whole nine days later -- you might have noticed if you pay attention to the the news (or, if you live in the Northeast, if you look out the window) is just a tad different.

"MONSTER STORM," NBC's homepage blares. "States Ban Travel as Blizzard Pummels Northeast."

"TOP-FIVE HISTORIC STORM.  30 Million Warned" is how the Huffington Post reports it.

"State of Emergency as Storm Strikes" is the front page headline on the Boston Globe.

"Obama Lies Cause Killer Storm", Fox News announces.  (Okay, so they didn't say that...)

Just nine days after a report of the warmest year ever in recorded history (which, the story said, "could provoke more sever storms") comes what some are calling possibly the worst snowstorm in the history of New York City, with up to three feet of snow in some parts of the Northeast.  Almost 7,000 flights were cancelled, 30 million people were impacted.

Imagine how terrible this would all be if there actually was Climate Change...

Republicans haven't had the greatest luck responding to the Statue of the Union Addresses by President Obama.  There was Gov. Bobby Jindal's (R-LA) infamous Norma Desmond-walk though a mansion before delivering a speech so weak that it pretty much killed his presidential aspirations.  There was Sen. Mario Rubio (R-FL) who became a laughingstock for his deer-in-the-headlights search for his water bottle.  There also was Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-MN) who delivered her entire response into the wrong camera.  (Though in fairness hers wasn't the "Official" GOP response, just her own self-indulgent "Tea Party" organization reply.

And now there was Sen. Joni Ernst (R-IA).

I have to acknowledge upfront that I didn't watch all of Ms. Ernst's response, or even most of it.  But I feel I had a good reason.  She had been a United States Senator for a whole two weeks.  So, I figured her inside knowledge of the state of the union wasn't a whole lot more than, say, mine -- and maybe even less so since she's been so deeply focused solely on the state of Iowa running for office there the past year -- that it wasn't likely I would get much thoughtful insight or specifics.  And from what I saw (and later read), I didn't.

She did deliver a perfectly straight forward speech, with no surface muck-ups, if you don't count a bit wooden and distant, but it dealt with the tried-and-true GOP staples of Richard Nixon's "good Republican cloth coat" and self-reliance in an effort to make her seem homey.  

And unfortunately that's where she screwed up big time.  You'd think that Republicans would have learned to actually vet this things beforehand and saying something like, "Hmm, gee, Senator, you really can't say that, it's going to make you seem really, really...well, bad."

In hawking her standing Republican mantra of self-reliance and "we did it all ourselves" and it doesn't take a village, and we don't need no stinkin' government, She said about her parents --

"They had very little to call their own except the sweat on their brow and the dirt on their hands. But they worked, they sacrificed, and they dreamed big dreams for their children and grandchildren.  And because they did, an ordinary Iowan like me has had some truly extraordinary opportunities because they showed me that you don’t need to come from wealth or privilege to make a difference. You just need the freedom to dream big, and a whole lot of hard work."

And a lot a government subsidies and hand-outs.

Now, I'd be pretty certain that Joni Ernst's parents and family worked incredibly hard under very difficult conditions.  But that isn't the point.  Because it isn't the point she was trying to make in trying to contradict the president's speech and proposals.  That's precisely why she left out some very pesky facts that would be troubling for her point and Republican's.

Like --

Her father, Richard Culver, got $14,705 in conservation payments and $23,690 in commodity subsidies from the federal government. 

Her uncle, Dallas Culver, received $367,141 in federal agricultural aid.. 

And her great-grandfather Harold Culver was $57,479 in federal aid, mostly corn subsidies—between 1995 and 2001.

Further, a construction company owned her was granted over $200,000 in county contracts.  (For those keeping a scorecard, this occurred when Ms. Ernst  was auditor of Montgomery County, Iowa, which new studies suggest might have violated a conflict of interest code over contracts to family members of county officials.

To be clear, there's nothing inherently wrong with getting federal subsidies.  (Well, okay, non-conflict of interest federal subsidies.)  The problem is when you're a hypocrite and try to claim you did it All On Your Own, without that durn gov'ment getting in your way.

And now we have a whole year to ponder who the Republican Party will chose to screw up next year's response to President Obama's State of the Union Address.  With the presidential election all the closer, it's hard to know if the contenders will be rushing for the honor -- or away running as fast as they can in the other direction.

Ahh, finally and at last -- my looong The Writers Workbench wrap-up of the 2015 Consumer Electronics Show has been posted.  As I explain each month, it's very time-consuming to code my TWW column what with all the graphics and hyperlinks to company website under normal conditions, but the CES wrap-up is so abnormally long (over 6,000 words, to get as much covered as possible, while hopefully not making anyone's head explode -- except mind...), which is why instead I link to it on the WGA website here.  

(It's also published on the Huffinton Post, which I do code, but a) I have my limits to how much I am willing to code, and b) I leave out some of the graphics on the HuffPo version, since the column is officially written for the Writers Guild website.)

Anyway, for thems what are interested, take a look at the article.  (Just rest up first...)  It's full of analysis of several "themes" that were apparent at CES on the direction technology appears to be headed in the coming year -- and years ahead -- along with discussion of a huge range of products I came across, as well as noting which things caught my eye as Cool Products.  And a few that reached the level of oddity.

Know, too, that much of this isn't just geeky tech computer stuff, but a lot of home appliances are included, as well, since that seems to be a direction that tech is making huge advances in these days, I think.  Some normal home appliances and some...well, less so, like this Pico Brew home brewer.

Anyway, browse over to the Writers Guild website here if you have a chance and the inclination.  There's plenty of folderol there that should cover many interests.  

And yes, browsing and skimming is allowed...