Yesterday I had the pleasure of attending a PRSA NJ sponsored event held at the SUNY Global Center in Manhattan meant to shed light on BP’s communication efforts before, during and after the disastrous oil leak of 2010. The discussion was held in a “mock trial” format with a judge, prosecutor, prosecutor’s witness, defense attorney and defense attorney’s witness. The audience was meant to act as the jury.

There were three major takeaways from the discussion:

1. The Importance of Workplace Culture

One of the most serious problems brought up during the debate was that BP’s corporate culture didn’t encourage discussions surrounding employee safety. The common sentiment was that workers were afraid to speak up about safety hazards for fear that it would put their job at stake. This meant that even though there were people before the crisis that could have spoken up about the impending disaster, they didn’t in order to save their position within the company. 

Part of the Public Relation/Communication Department’s responsibility within a company is to understand company culture, shape it and then represent it accurately. Progress must start from the inside out and in the case of BP, it appeared that the PR Department failed to make sure internal communication was in line with company best practices.

2. “People don’t care what you know until they know you care”

A  well-spoken statement made by the prosecutor’s witness, David Kalson, CEO of Ricochet PR.

BP made plenty of mistakes in the days, weeks and months following the crisis, but they all seemed to stem from the public’s perception that they were insensitive and simply seeking to save the “bottom line”. By not showing empathy and humility, especially with regards to the 11 employees that were lost during the spill, BP ruined any chance they had of the public listening to their point of view. This was further amplified by remarks made by then-CEO Tony Hayward stating he just “wanted his life back” and that the spill was a mere drop in the ocean.

3. Don’t Overlook Legal Regulations 

Perhaps one of the most enlightening moments of the night came when a gentleman from the “jury” raised the very valid and often overlooked point that when dealing with a crisis such as an oil spill, corporations must follow very strict government laws and regulations. In this case, BP was required to follow protocol as outlined in the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, giving them very little wiggle room in how they could present the information at hand. Unfortunately, we didn’t have ample time to delve further into this particular aspect of the case, but it definitely shed light on the fact that more research needs to be done before one can make conclusive remarks about the competency of BP’s communications department during and after the oil spill.

Thank you PRSA NJ and all the wonderful panelists and guests for a great seminar - I look forward to more thought-provoking events like this one in the future!

Contributed by Doreen Naor, NYU PRSSA President