RWarehall: Both these Tweets, GoG apologized almost immediately when they were misinterpreted. Deleted the tweets; explained what they meant by it; and offered their apologies to those who may have felt offended.
(1) Textbook cases of corporate non-apologies don't count as "apologies". Never have, never will.
"While no apology was issued, GOG.com took the opportunity to recommit itself to refocusing its messaging solely about the games it sells.". That was it. We call that "adding insult to injury", not "apologizing".
(2) One tweet mocked transgender people with a reactionary meme. The tweet was in no way "misinterpreted". You want
civil discourse? That was the opposite.
(3) One tweet mocked transgender people by purposefully hijacking a hashtag transgender people use to fight for their right to exist. The social media manager wasn't that incompetent that he didn't know exactly what the hashtag meant. The tweet was in no way "misinterpreted". You want
civil discourse? That was the opposite.
(4) One tweet alluded to a deeply misogynist hate movement. The tweet featured an all out anti-games press picture from a game DLC that literally has a neo-nazi voice actor chosen for his prominence in beforementioned hate movement. The tweet was in no way "misinterpreted". You want
civil discourse? That was the opposite.
(5) The explanation GOG gave for the last fuckup of the former social media manager wasn't just a non-apology, it was also obviously a lie or rather several lies at once.
"The tweet was neither intended as a malicious attack, nor as a comment to the ongoing social debate." is what they said. But communicating in reactionary memes and going wink wink at the most vile combatants in a hate movement is factually a malicious attack, it is factually a comment on the ongoing debate, and it is obviously intended as both.