British Petroleum Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill: Who is Accountable?

            4.9 million barrels of crude oil were spilled into the Gulf of Mexico in mid-2010 and spread 3,850 square miles leaving a deadly path of 11 perished bodies as well as 4,768 animal carcasses collected in four months. The British Petroleum Deepwater Horizon oil spill was the largest oil spill in US history during peacetime in US waters. The Deepwater Horizon oil rig exploded and sank on April 21, 2010 and continued to leak oil for 87 days as experts worked to clog the pipeline. There was massive media coverage about first the initial sinking, then the repercussions of the environmental impact. News stories have continued to swirl around the western world, citing causes and discussing who should be blamed, revamping this past week due to BP beginning to engage in a trial by the US Department of Justice addressing where to officially lay the blame on this catastrophic environmental event. As this story has progressed, the blame for this spill was first of confusion, next on BP and its executives, and has now progressed to BP naming the fault on others as the reputation and the bank accounts of British Petroleum's top management lay on the line.

            On April 21, 2010, the New York Times first reported on the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, citing that 11 workers were missing, three critically injured, and that oil was leaking into the Gulf but the resulting fire was burning up the majority of it. At that time, the rig was not expected to collapse and it was “unclear what caused the explosion”(Robertson). There was a lot of confusion as officials and analysts were interviewed but nobody knew the cause or reasoning behind such an explosion. At this point in the news story, the New York Times is mainly fulfilling its duty to report “content of the highest quality and integrity” as they believed it their duty to report on the 11 lives lost upon this oil rig (New York Times Company). The story is relatively brief and systematic, as not much information is known aside from Coast Guard reports. It was printed on page A13 of the New York Times paper edition, obviously not front-page content but still notable with the potential for the story to develop. The who, what, where, when, and how are answered to the best of the author’s capability but with a dearth of details, it’s function is little more than an informative piece. This story is the type of human-interest story that avid readers of the Times enjoy reading; however, not many people would take notice of this story, especially those outside of the southeastern part of the United States. Meanwhile, BP was lamenting the fact that this extremely expensive oil rig had failed. BP had not released any statements at this time as the fire had been burning less than five hours at press time. No one could have predicted the impact of this explosion at this time.

            By July 27, 2010, the Deepwater Horizon oil spill had reached catastrophic levels with unprecedented sea life lost as well as billions of dollars lost in the fishing industry. The leaking well was capped by July 15, but heavy criticisms had been drawn on BP’s CEO Tony Hayward because of his lack of oversight and concern of the spill before, during, and after the accident. On July 27, Hayward resigns his position as CEO due to American pressure and circumstantial evidence of overlooking safety guidelines when building the rig to save money. While the majority of news outlets condemn Hayward and his actions surrounding the spill, Bloomberg.com releases an article that is more objective than its passionate competitors who are fueling the public fire of their upset readers. Unlike many other articles of the day that were continuing to demonize Hayward, Bloomberg praises him for how he dealt with the crisis. Bloomberg is mainly an equity trading platform and an on-the-side, objective news outlet structured to appeal to informed business people and intends to deliver news relevant to the economy. The published article acknowledges Hayward’s blunders, that are thoroughly analyzed by other news outlets, but the authors Eduard Gismatullin and Brian Swint also state that “Hayward isn’t the first CEO of BP to quit under a cloud,” and that his resignation is in-line with “the need of the board to get BP’s reputation back” (Gismatullin, Swint). It is structured to appeal to more dispassionate parties and scrutinizes the situation analytically in relation to how the resignation was a wise business strategy. The article continues on to note the 16 percent gain in BP’s shares and the overtake of Exxon Mobil during Hayward’s stint as CEO. Other articles omit this history as his resignation is predicated by dark events such as 11 dead workers, $17.2 billion in assets lost, and botched safety requirements clouding his path after his pledge to improve safety after a deadly 2005 explosion before his appointment to CEO. Bloomberg.com is more sympathetic towards Hayward as analysts report the value he added to BP. They do this with reporting Hayward’s qualifications for the job and label the hype around the oil spill as “xenophobic” (Gismatullin, Swint). This article attempts to view Hayward’s resignation in a more globalized context, when other articles are more narrow-minded, as well as anticipates how BP will adjust publicly and privately, with a new American representative CEO, in the economic sphere. It was a refreshing and unique viewpoint compared to the multitude of disapproving opinions about Hayward’s performance as CEO.

            The British Broadcasting Corporation has a Royal Charter and Agreement with the United Kingdom and is a private news outlet that pledges to be “independent, impartial, and honest” with its reporting (Inside the BBC: Public Purposes). It is structured to report news that “represents the UK, its nations, regions and communities” and therefore has an interest in how this story was directing so much criticism to a British-associated oil drilling company (Inside the BBC: Public Purposes). In the aftermath of the oil spill, as cleanup efforts were becoming exhausted and the US was beginning to assign blame, the BBC highlighted a story on October 6, 2010 titled “Gulf Oil Spill Commission Criticizes White House” (BBC News). It is interesting to observe that this story did not appear in any American media as the core of the story emphasizes that “The Obama administration blocked government scientists’ efforts to inform the public of worst case scenarios,” and that they were “too optimistic about handling the disaster” (BBC News). The article continues to use phrases such as “controlling information” and that the United States’ initial government response “seemed to lag” suggesting that partial blame can be pulled away from British Petroleum. This is important because the BBC is pointing out that while the initial fault may be the BP’s, the extent of the spill was the fault of the United States. This article is partially biased as it is written with a British interest in mind, however any indication that the US was at fault was not published in US-run media. Perhaps, this story was run to reassure UK citizens of joint blame and used to partially restore image of BP in the UK.

            This week, the Department of Justice began its trial against BP over environmental violations involved with economic losses, ecological devastation, and human deaths. In November 2012, a criminal settlement was reached with BP before a trial for 3 million dollars to be paid for the Gulf damage and fines (National Claims Center). Now they are assigning blame to various parties, which is relevant because it determines who pays how much in fines for the clean-up bills. On February 28, 2013 a blog was published on Lawyers.com detailing an update on the trial. The article was attached to a Facebook page named BP Deepwater Horizon Claims that was created specifically for those who were directly impacted by the oil spill and believe that BP should be held accountable for the oil spill. It posts articles and updates on who is eligible for compensation from BP and this was one such article. The article summarized the testimony of BP executive Mark Bly, the one who lead the internal investigation of BP concerning the oil spill. The article describes how he admitted that executive management wasn’t investigated in the aftermath of the spill because there was an exception encouraging him to refrain from it, which was justified by the circumstances. He then suggested sharing the blame between subcontractors Transocean Ltd. and Halliburton Co. because of oversight problems. There is a lot of speculation in response to this trial’s circumstances, wondering if BP will settle before it is over and how the money will be allocated. It is geared towards an audience that is looking to acquire a piece of this settlement money and is quick to point out the faults in BP’s trial reasoning which would encourage an individual or business to use these lawyer services and apply for a piece of the potential money. The story ends on the suggestion that BP’s settlement money would be used to support Gulf conservation efforts and work on restoration projects, leaving the reader with a lingering thought about how they could qualify for these funds. This article could be said to be “forwarding”. Forwarding, as written by Joseph Harris, is to say something new on a previously discussed topic and add to it, rather than reply to the text (Harris 35-36). This article encourages readers to apply for the lawyer services by being exceptionally biased with its encouragement that BP will settle before the trial is finished. It prompts, “further talk and writing” on the subject, submitting readers to contemplation about how the oil spill affected them (Harris 35-36). With this reasoning, the article would most likely only target southeastern people who live in the affected states. Even so, it is important to note how this oil spill has had a great affect on the economy with multiple repercussions in more ways than simply changing the physical waters of the Gulf of Mexico.

            I have followed the news stories surrounding the BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill since it first broke back in 2010. The intense environmental and economic damage was catastrophic, unprecedented, and unfortunate however, after reading about different aspects of the story, I would be disappointed if British Petroleum did not severely implement its revised safety requirements on its oil rigs. I think that they should be held liable because of their negligence but I am wary of how the United States will disperse the money and in what time frame as was the example with Hurricane Sandy. I think that the media played a fair role in its coverage of the story, helpfully explaining the problems with clogging the pipeline when the majority of the public was uneducated with the structure of an oil rig. I think that the media was aggressive in placing blame on BP and oversaw the potential of partial blame being placed on the US government. I believe that it is important to know how our nation responds to crises such as this one and the media should have highlighted this angle in order for the public to receive the whole truth of the news story. The lessons learned from this event will not be easily forgotten and it will be imperative for both public and private individuals to ensure that an unforced accident of this scale is not repeated in the future.

  

Works Cited

"Blockbuster BP Oil Trial Set to Start Today." Web log post. BP Deepwater Horizon: National             Claims Center. Danziger & De Llano LLP., 25 Feb. 2013. Web. 3 Mar. 2013. <http://            www.bpdeepwaterhorizon.com/latest-news/>.

"BP Oil Spill: Disaster by Numbers." The Independent. Independent Digital News and Media, 14             Sept. 2010. Web. 03 Mar. 2013. <http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/bp-oil-spill-             disaster-by-numbers-2078396.html>.

Crank, Josh. "BP’s Internal Investigation Left Crucial Stones Unturned." Web log post.             Lawyers.com. LexisNexis: Martindale-Hubbell, 28 Feb. 2013. Web. 3 Mar. 2013. <http://             blogs.lawyers.com/2013/02/bp-investigation-left-stones-unturned/>.

Gismatullin, Eduard, and Brian Swint. "Hayward's Resignation Inevitable After BP Spill             Undermined Safety Pledge." Bloomberg. Bloomberg L.P., 27 July 2010. Web. 03 Mar. 2013. <http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-07-27/hayward-s-resignation-inevitable-after-bp-spill-undermined-safety-pledge.html>.

"Gulf Oil Spill Commission Criticizes White House." BBC News. BBC, 6 Oct. 2010. Web. 03             Mar. 2013. <http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11489960>.

"Inside the BBC: Public Purposes." BBC News. BBC, n.d. Web. 03 Mar. 2013. <http://            www.bbc.co.uk/aboutthebbc/insidethebbc/whoweare/publicpurposes/>.

"New York Times Company : Careers : Mission & Values." New York Times. New York Times             Company, n.d. Web. 03 Mar. 2013. <http://www.nytco.com/careers/mission.html>.

Robertson, Campbell. "Search Continues After Oil Rig Blast." New York Times 22 Apr. 2010,             New York ed., A13 sec.: 13. The New York Times. The New York Times, 22 Apr. 2010.             Web. 03 Mar. 2013. <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/22/us/22rig.html?_r=0>.