Against the Flow: the Taboo of Praising BP

No-one in their right mind makes light of the disaster. But, according to this article, BP may deserve a bit of a break — at least on a local level:

BP has endured waves of scathing criticism during the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, but there are those who are offering it qualified praise for the work it is doing, writes the BBC's Matthew Price in Louisiana.

Whisper it, but BP is not a dirty word here in the coastal town of Jean Lafitte.

..."We're not too popular for saying it, but here BP's doing good," one says. There's general agreement.

In recent years this town has been affected by Hurricanes Katrina, Gustav, and Ike.

"FEMA didn't even set up an office here. BP's done more than they ever did," another says.

For obvious reasons the fishermen and others whose lives and livelihoods have been ruined by the devastating oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico are cagey when asked about how the British oil company has responded to the disaster.

Few want to go on the record in expressing praise, but all along Jean Lafitte Boulevard, the main street here, people pragmatically note that BP is probably doing as good a job as anyone could.

"I think BP's possibly doing all they can to help us," the local mayor, Timothy Kerner, says of the local effort.

He's exhausted, after working 18 hour days, seven days a week for the last ten weeks. He's also frustrated, but with the government.

"I would think that for whatever reason the federal government left it up to BP to solve it. [But] now they've put the coastguard in to do the work. The coastguard is more of a problem than a problem solver.

"There are too many jurisdiction battles between parishes with coastguard leaders, and I actually thought we were doing better working straight with BP to be honest with you..."

Source

Could it be that (well-justified) anger over the spill has clouded a sober assessment of what BP is now achieving in the cleanup? According to some on the ground BP is at least doing a better job than FEMA or the coast guard.

I have to confess I find it 'interesting' that of all the possible angles to investigate, the BBC produces a report that tends to exonerate BP of some of the vehement criticism it has been subjected to in recent weeks.

So is this MSM report misleading, and if so, to what degree?

Does the comparison between the different agencies stand up to scrutiny?

And would you give credit where credit is due were BP to actually show itself seriously committed to the clean-up?

Or is BP simply beyond the pale?

That's sort like saying "my new partner doesn't beat me as bad as my former one did".

BP is criminal. They are shortening peoples' lives, compromising their health by refusing to allow workers the proper safety gear, underestimating everything, withholding crucial information...

Yes, they are indeed "beyond the pale", and all the executives in that company should be tried for crimes against humanity and executed or sentenced to life terms physically cleaning the mess they've created.

The article also says that things only got "better" when Tony Hayward was replaced by BP. That was only a couple weeks ago.
BP is now trying to do as much damage control to their reputation as possible--only to keep their company alive. Not because they genuinely want to spend any of their money on fixing the horrible mess they made, IMO.

Originally posted by pause4thought

And would you give credit where credit is due were BP to actually show itself seriously committed to the clean-up?

Well it's about time.

As far as giving credit where credit is due, that will come when BP becomes more focused on cleanup and less on coverup.

news.muckety.com...

BP hires politically connected PR firms

So now you see the type of articles they were hired to write.

The oil industry as a whole has honestly been more interested in developing technologies based on getting the oil out of the ground. None have really thought much on how to get it off the face of the ground and everything it covers when a disaster occurs. Unfortunately BP, like other oil companies, never thought ahead. The sadness of losing jobs, lives, and nature hits all people of this country and countries that depend on the lives that have been affected.
Though, BP has been paying local shrimpers an equivalent to a year's salary to help clean up the mess that has been created. I'm expecting the money won't equal half the debt that these hard working individuals will be facing in the long run. The toxic vapors these people's bodies absorb now will bring about cancers and nervous system damages in later years, which we'll all hear about in a class action lawsuit about 10-20 years from now.
I don't praise BP, or any other big oil company. My future husband works in the offshore oil drilling fields. The working people out there are being affected by the sanctions the Prez has put out against offshore drilling. It's sad all the way around. Thousands of drilling, maintenance, and hospitality jobs are being lost; because of the decisions made by ALL to not worry about the "What If's " and ponder the prospects of actually having to clean up or remove spills.
We'll see how this turns out but, I personally foresee people all over the US being affected now and years from now and it doesn't look very good.

Originally posted by mhc_70

Originally posted by pause4thought

And would you give credit where credit is due were BP to actually show itself seriously committed to the clean-up?

Well it's about time.

As far as giving credit where credit is due, that will come when BP becomes more focused on cleanup and less on coverup.

Even IF (IMO, they're gonna stall 'till it's too late to do any TRUE clean-up) they do some clean up, it wont change the fact that they cause this on purpose, or out of greed (for a freaking cheaper valve); it wont change the fact that they hide the actual extent of the damage; it wont change the fact that they still TODAY, WEEKS AFTER THE FACT, try to escape financial responsability; it wont change the fact that they're still pourring Corexit which makes the matter incredibly worse; it wont change the fact that they STILL try to make us believe that everything's fine... "no problem, everything's under control."...

So, tell me what is it to praise them for, now or ever??

But the real problem is not BP, unfortunately...
We are in dark times, and Man doesnt do a damn thing about it. Worse, we contribute actively to our own doom.

If we were BP representatives we would do about the same (no)thing.
Man is an irresponsible/egotistic/delusional species which is good at commplaining, blaming but seldom look upon their own flaws till it's too late. And that explains (not justify) what's about to come down on us... And I dont speak about some antichrist nor God's wrath... Just us... to ourselves...

[edit on 1-7-2010 by Project_USA]

BP would be praiseworthy if this accident was a non-issue. If it never happened because they decided it prudent and their solomn responsibility to generate profit in a reasonable, safe manner beneficial to shareholders. They have not.

These are not businessmen bringing prosperity, they are criminals engaged in criminal activities. The Board of BP should already have been extradited to the US and should be sitting prison awaiting trial. If any one of us had committed such a crime, we certainly would be in custody at this very moment.

BP should not be praised.

Praise should be heaped upon the victims. Praise them and their efforts to restore what BP has destroyed.


[edit on 1-7-2010 by mike_trivisonno]

[edit on 1-7-2010 by mike_trivisonno]

Originally posted by JBA2848
news.muckety.com...

BP hires politically connected PR firms

So now you see the type of articles they were hired to write.

Nice connecting the dots. Skilled.

(But oh so self-defeating!)



reply to other posts


Interesting to see the reactions to this article. It's the reactions that interest me more than the article itself, actually, as whereas the report is based on a microcosm, the board can sometimes provide a cross-section.

Maybe those who think BP has done some things to its credit would be reluctant to post.

I find it noteworthy that the one poster who is prepared to countenance some acknowledgement of an improvement is still very cynical, and frankly not impressed:

Originally posted by Chamberf=6
The article also says that things only got "better" when Tony Hayward was replaced by BP. That was only a couple weeks ago.
BP is now trying to do as much damage control to their reputation as possible--only to keep their company alive. Not because they genuinely want to spend any of their money on fixing the horrible mess they made, IMO.

The other views coming in are as completely devastating for the reputation of the company as ever.

Nonetheless while many state/imply those running BP should be criminally culpable I can't help wondering whether any other big company (not to mention oil conglomerate) would actually have done things much differently — as Project_USA implied.

Originally posted by pause4thought
Nonetheless while many state/imply those running BP should be criminally culpable I can't help wondering whether any other big company (not to mention oil conglomerate) would actually have done things much differently — as Project_USA implied.

There is a huge contrast in the way other oil conglomrates followed the rules compared to BP.

BP had 760 safety violations in the past five years and paid $373 million in fines, Sullivan said. By contrast, Sunoco and ConocoPhillips each had eight safety violations and ExxonMobil just one, Sullivan said.

source