At the beginning of this chapter, we talked about BP’s failure to communicate competently in the wake of the Deepwater Horizon explosion. Let’s consider the spill and reactions to it in light of what you’ve learned in this chapter.
Communication disasters in the Gulf were many: public-relations gaffes, lack of coordination, confusion over who was in control, and avoidance of responsibility. These communication failures had real economic consequences: fishing and tourism are crucial to the Gulf Coast economy, and many people lost their livelihoods as the oil spill killed marine life and fouled beaches. Deepwater drilling is also vital to the Gulf Coast economy; a Louisiana oil industry group estimated that each rig in the Gulf of Mexico represented monthly wages of at least $165 million (Zeller, 2010).
BP executive Tony Hayward’s comments and activity in the days and weeks that followed the spill showed that he failed to consider the situational context. Hayward’s words and behavior (enjoying a yacht race as oil gushed into the Gulf) displayed that he didn’t appreciate the needs and distress of the Gulf Coast community still suffering the economic and social effects of Hurricane Katrina.
In the end, Hayward’s apology largely fell flat because of the transactional nature of communication. He might have been able to utter apologetic words for his statements and behavior, but nothing could ultimately erase listeners’ memories. Once a communication transaction occurs, it cannot be reversed.
Consider also the effectiveness of the corporate messages. While the media focused on the vastness of the devastation, offering insights from locals and showing detailed, twenty-four-hour coverage of the spill itself, messages from BP seemed more concerned with protecting the company than with conveying clear and accurate information. Thus, the messages were not appropriate for the situation, nor were they effective in helping the company’s PR image.