Analysis of the British Petroleum Deep Water Horizon Disaster - Case Study Example

Section/# Image, Disaster, and Effect: An Analysis of the British Petroleum Deep Water Horizon Disaster as a Function of How Image and Interpretation of Image Effected the Way the Firm was and to a Large Extent – Continues to be Viewed Discuss PR blitz and advertisements in order to convince the Gulf States as well as the rest of the country that they have done good on their word, implemented new safety procedures as well as cleaned up the millions of gallons of oil that were spilled as a result of the disaster However, what most analysts do not discuss is the fact that the oil spill itself was oftentimes not as damaging to BP’s image as the salacious stories, cover-ups, and bold faced corruption that defined the initial response and PR machinations with regards to the incident. This analysis will attempt to highlight some of the ways in which BP responded which actually served to backfire on the overall goal that the PR blitz espoused. Similarly, the analysis will also focus the attention of the reader on the positive PR mechanisms that actually helped to lessen the animosity and negative images associated with the firm shortly after the Deep Water Horizon incident. Prior to delving into the issues surrounding the way that the public perceived the Deep Water Horizon disaster, it is necessary to understand the position and perceptions that surrounded BP prior to the even taking place. As such, the reader is able to gain an understanding regarding how completely and totally the image of BP suffered from the incident as well as understanding the prior level of consumer confidence and respect that was previously placed upon the firm in the realm of public opinion (Gaines-Ross 2010). Obviously, grasping the true nature of what way in which BP wanted to be seen by the world requires that one analyze the most basic element of company culture and mission that consumers were likely to engage with. This central element is concentric upon the BP logo itself. Obviously, a petroleum, natural gas, and oil producing firm is not naturally seen as one of the most environmentally friendly organizations that exist. However, long before the Green movements swept Europe and the United States, BP realized the power of imagery as a function of their logo (referenced below in Figure 1.0). In order to accomplish this positive representation, BP chose earth tones of green and yellow to represent their firm. This subtle yet highly ingenious idea meant that the BP emblem became to be associated with purity and cleanliness among the consumer markets. This subtle goal is represented by not only the firm’s logo but by many of the pre-Deep Water Horizon disaster commercials that aired throughout the United States, Canada, and parts of Europe. Figure 1.0 Furthermore, highly stylized and futuristic displays of the fuel that BP provides were included in such commercials. This high technology was juxtaposed with an environmentally friendly and/or sustainable way by casting the action of the commercial within a purposefully rural and/or natural setting. In this way, BP hoped to cast its image as a responsible environmental partner while at the same time providing a high standard of energy to its client base. It was within this particular marketing framework and product placement that BP found itself embroiled in one of the largest man-made oil disasters that the world had yet experienced. On April 20th, 2010 a massive explosion caused by a fire on board the oil rig due to malfunction combined with operator error of one of the key drilling apparatus. The explosion subsequently killed 11 rig workers and proceeded to release in excess of 4.9 million barrels of crude oil into the ocean for the next three months until the well was effectively capped. The subsequent damage to the environment as well as the monetary effect that the disaster had with respect to fishing and tourism along the Gulf Coast of the United States was profound. Equally profound, at least from the perspective of BP was the bitterly negative feelings that soon developed among consumers with regards to the way in which the firm acted in regards to custodians of the environment. BP’s previously squeaky clean image among consumers, aided by the advertising and logo previously mentioned was indelibly tarnished with a particularly strong association to images such as those in Figure 2.0 Figure 2.0 Realizing that this epoch could well define the way that a huge subset of their customer base viewed the company, BP set out on what can only be described as a monumental and exceptionally costly effort to reshape their company’s image (Morrissey 2010). However, this effort was misguided from both an ethical and effectual standpoint due to the fact that the response came across as far too pedagogical while at the same time seemingly dismissive of the integral elements of accepting guilt and working to renew the environment which such a disaster had most certainly and profoundly affected. The first mistake the BP made with respect to attempting to assuage the consumer’s anger and sense of frustration was the fact that BP sought to explain the disaster to the public in highly technical terms which many saw as a vain attempt to blow figurative smoke over the issue and as a way that the firm sought to conceal guilt (Jenson 2010). Regardless of whether such a technical approach was indeed intended to confuse and disrupt the perceptions of the consumer, this is the effect that such an approach had. Alternately interesting is the fact that even though BP experienced profits well over one billion dollar annually, the firm was not perceptive enough to realize that their approach was not resonating with consumers. As such, the entire force and monetary wherewithal of BP’s marketing and public relations branches continued to push an angle that not only failed to accept guilt and work to present an image of a penitent firm that was working with all due haste and speed to ameliorate the damage they had caused but also wasted extremely valuable response time with regards to the issue and consumer opinion. As will be evidenced by the forthcoming analysis, although BP was on the right path with regards to working rapidly to ameliorate the negative orientation that many consumers and shareholders viewed their company as a result of the Deep Water Horizon incident, the particular approach that BP sought to pursue was fundamentally flowed. As most public relations specialists will be quick to note, the speed in which a firm is able to respond to an event is perhaps one of the most important ways in which the effective level to which the public interaction and buy-in can be effected. However, an equally effective step and every bit as important is concentric upon the individual message(s) that is conveyed via this fast response. As BP soon learned, although their mechanism was on the right path with regards to rapidly responding to the incident and seeking to lay out a way forward, the way forward was fundamentally flawed and did not resonate with key shareholders that needed to be reached. What is of additional interest is the fact that BP was given two distinct restarts with respect to the way in which they approached the public relations debacle that ensued; however, in both instances, they ignored the most common denominator and sought to engage the audience in the way that they perceived the situation should be handled rather than advocating a response that was concentric upon the views, objections, and worries expressed by the key shareholders they were attempting to reach. However, BP’s public relations debacle did not end here. Instead, the company quickly determined that one of the best ways to regain consumer confidence and work to rebrand and reposition their company in terms of the way that consumers identified with it would be to embark on an aggressive and exorbitantly expensive advertisement campaign that was shockingly transparent with regards to the level of elicit propaganda which was used. Again, rather than focusing on the ways in which the company could express a sense of sorrow and regret over the inadvertent damage to the natural environment, the company sought to minimize the incident via an approach that worked to simply cast life in the Gulf as back to normal. These commercials in all of their different forms (all in all around 20 different iterations of the same message were produced to air on select stations and markets around the nation) did not achieve the desired result that BP was going for. With respect to the residents of the Gulf Coast, the ads served to only solidify previously strongly negative feelings with relation to the firm. These commercials showed a series of pristine images in and around the Gulf Coast. The images were juxtaposed with a deeply reassuring and invariably male voice which stated that life was back to normal and the beaches were “sparkling”. The advertisement campaign subsequently served to only further infuriate these residents that had prior knowledge concerning the true nature of the way in which the spill and subsequent cleanup operation were handled by the firm. To add insult to injury the advertisements also focused on the fact that life was “getting back to normal” in the gulf states with images associated with wildlife and fishing industries prominent among the many shots that were included (Mckinlay 2012). This could not have been further from the case due to the fact that it was well documented in both the national news, as well as specifically within the Gulf Coast where the disaster most specifically affected these groups, that fish and shrimp yields were noticeably affected by the oil spill. This secondary failure with respect to attempting to present the bright face of the future at a time when the cleanup efforts were still underway may have had the desired effect among certain elements of the population who were paying little if any attention to the spill; however, for those whose lives had been defined by the incident and the environmental protection entities that were working around the clock to ameliorate the lingering effects to the environment with respect to Deep Water Horizon, the message was one of insincere propaganda. Such a misstep only served to harden the way in which many key shareholders viewed the BP Corporation. The Deep Water Horizon disaster is of special importance with regards to not only the long-term effects that it necessarily portends for the environment but also as a vehicle to understand the way that a large multi-national firm can get it so wrong with respect to gauging and interacting the public’s needs with respect to the event. Furthermore, one of the largest reasons why the firm continues to be tarnished by the image of Deep Water Horizon, asides from the fact that it was the single largest off-shore oil spill in North American history, is the fact that both attempts to represent the firm in a positive light to the consumer/shareholder were bungled in nearly every fashion. To BP’s credit, the firm did not waste any time or spare any expense in seeking to engage the public with their message; however, the fact that the message seemed so hastily put together and so divergent from the needs of the key shareholders in question only served to widen the gap of understanding the existed as a function of the disaster. In short, restoring consumer loyalty and brand image after such an event is something that is not accomplished overnight or even over a period of years. However, due to the fact that the firm had two distinct golden opportunities with respect to recovering consumer trust and squandered them, the recovery period in terms of image realignment will necessarily become a much longer and more laborious process in which BP and their public relations teams will need to persistently engage. References Gaines-Ross, L 2010, Reputation Warfare, Harvard Business Review, 88, 12, pp. 70-76, Business Source Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 29 October 2012. Jensen, K, & Snyder, J 2010, Outrage Grows. So Does BPs Beltway Crew, Bloomberg Businessweek, 4184, pp. 30-31, Business Source Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 29 October 2012. Mckinlay, JJ 2012, Regulation, Renegotiation, and Reform: Improving Transnational Public-Private Partnerships in the Wake of the Gulf Oil Spill, Indiana Law Journal, 87, 3, pp. 1315-1344, Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 29 October 2012. Morrissey, B 2010, BP Gets Aggressive, Adweek, 51, 25, p. 4, Business Source Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 29 October 2012. Read More