I think his point is that any words used in an apology are meaningless, because we have no way to differentiate between a genuine apology and a PR apology based on the words.
Instead, only pay attention to the actions that follow, because those cannot be faked.
Exactly. I could have used more positive phrasing: "they have an opportunity to demonstrate sincerity by taking substantive action to correct their decision making process," but I missed that opportunity.
I am also not exactly sure what makes an apology from a company that much different than an apology from an individual; in both cases, they could either be sincere or lying, and there is no real way to tell from the words alone.
Individuals lie, just like companies do. The rate of lying might be different, but that doesn't really change much.
True, companys just have professional liers, called marketing/pr.
But well, yes. It might be an exaggeration. To look at it positively, marketing people are just good at communicating ... only the borders to missleading and plain lying are very blurry ...
Instead, only pay attention to the actions that follow, because those cannot be faked.