BP touts itself as 'green,' but faces PR disaster with 'BP oil spill'
Thursday, May 6, 2010
What do you call a gigantic man-made disaster that is threatening to despoil the ecosystems and wreck the economies of the Gulf Coast? The answer is important, if you happen to be one of the companies responsible for it.
The massive slick spreading toward Louisiana has gone by several names since crude oil began gushing from a damaged drilling rig on April 20. Media accounts have referred to it as "the Gulf oil spill," "the Deepwater Horizon spill" and the "Gulf Coast disaster."
President Obama, leaving little doubt about whom he considers responsible for the epic mess, put a brand name on it in remarks in Louisiana on Sunday. The president dubbed it "the BP oil spill," after the company (formerly British Petroleum) that leased the now-damaged drilling platform. The Environmental Protection Agency refers to it the same way in its official pronouncements.
The name of a disaster can be critical, both as a historic matter and the more immediate matters of image, public relations and legal liability. BP has said it will honor "legitimate" claims from people and businesses seeking compensation from disruption caused by the spill. But since there are likely to be many disputed claims ("This is America -- come on," BP chief executive Tony Hayward told the Times of London on Wednesday), having your company's name inextricably linked to a disaster can't help when a jury begins assigning damages.
BP could face the same fate as another oil giant, Exxon, whose name is forever stamped on the 1989 oil spill in Prince William Sound, Alaska. That spill was named for the Exxon Valdez, the tanker that hit a reef and ruptured. Other calamities -- plane crashes, the Tylenol poisonings -- have been shorthanded by a corporate or product name, too.
But companies don't always get top billing, even when they acknowledge responsibility. The leak of poisonous chemicals at a plant in Bhopal, India -- which killed as many as 12,000 people -- came to be known more by its place of origin than by the company that owned the plant, Union Carbide. Similarly, the partial meltdown of a Pennsylvania nuclear power plant in 1979 was named after the facility where the incident occurred, Three Mile Island. Few people remember the name of the company that operated the plant and was responsible for its safety, General Public Utilities.
BP has been careful not to invoke its name in regard to the spill. "We refer to it as Gulf of Mexico response," said Andrew Gowers, the company's spokesman. BP's Web site (http:/
In a series of television interviews on Monday, BP's Hayward tried to thread a tricky needle, taking responsibility for the cleanup but shifting some of the blame to others.
"This wasn't our accident," he said on ABC's "Good Morning America." "This was a drilling rig operated by another company. It was their people, their systems, their processes. We are responsible not for the accident, but we are responsible for the oil and for dealing with it and for cleaning the situation up."
"You're not responsible for the accident?" host George Stephanopoulos asked, a bit incredulously.
Hayward explained that the explosion occurred on a rig owned by Transocean, a drilling company based in Switzerland, and that the rig was leased by BP. "It was their equipment that's failed; it was their systems and processes that were running it," Hayward said.
Major oil spills are infrequent in the United States, and there's no standard way of naming them, said Bill Bush, a spokesman for the American Petroleum Institute, a Washington industry group. The two usual ways are by location ("the New Orleans spill") or by the name of the facility or ship involved (Exxon Valdez, Argo Merchant, Athos 1). Companies typically don't get tarred; the 1969 spill off the coast of Southern California came to be known not by the company that caused it, Union Oil of California, but by where it happened ("the Santa Barbara spill").