TPM LiveWire

The 7 Dumbest Things BP Has Said About The Spill -- So Far


BP executives Lamar McKay, Bob Dudley, and Tony Hayward

Share

Twitter Fark Reddit Send to a Friend

Send to a friend!

To email:    Your Name:    Your email:

These BP executives just can't seem to avoid saying stupid things. While scrambling to deal with the worst oil spill in U.S. history, they keep putting their feet right in their mouths -- making statements that make the oil giant come across as elitist, insensitive and disingenuous. It sure doesn't seem to be helping their PR problem.

Here's a roundup of the seven dumbest things BP executives said over the last two months:

1. The 'Tiny' Spill
Last month, BP CEO Tony Hayward said in an interview with The Guardian that the amount of oil and dispersant in the Gulf of Mexico were relatively "tiny" compared to the "very big ocean."

"The Gulf of Mexico is a very big ocean. The amount of volume of oil and dispersant we are putting into it is tiny in relation to the total water volume."

2. 'Very, Very Modest'
Just a few days later, Hayward told Sky News that "everything we can see at the moment suggests that the overall environmental impact of this will be very, very modest." Watch it here.

Later in the month, Hayward changed his tune and said the spill was "clearly an environmental catastrophe." Watch it here.

3. Give Me My Life Back!
With the cameras rolling, Hayward says he's really motivated to plug the Gulf of Mexico oil leak so he can get his life back. "Y'know, I'd like my life back," he said. "So there's no one who wants this thing done more than I do, and we are doing everything we can to contain the oil offshore, defend the shoreline and return people's lives to normal as fast as we can." Watch it here.

He later apologized.


4. 'Big And Important'
BP Chairman Carl-Henric Svanberg told the Financial Times on May 25 -- his first newspaper interview since the April 20 Deepwater Horizon explosion -- that his company still has a future in the U.S. because BP is "big and important."

"The US is a big and important market for BP, and BP is also a big and important company for the US, with its contribution to drilling and oil and gas production. So the position goes both ways."



5. Plumes? What Plumes?
On May 30, Hayward disputed the claims of scientists who say the disastrous oil leak has resulted in gigantic undersea plumes of oil. Hayward says BP testing has shown "no evidence" of this. "

"The oil is on the surface," Hayward said. "There aren't any plumes."

6. 'A Relative Trickle'
BP COO Doug Suttles told the Associated Press on June 8 that the oil leak should slow to "a relative trickle" soon. (It has not).

He later tried to clarify that comment, saying that BP's containment system "will never capture every drop, but it should be able to capture the vast majority." It has yet to do that, either.





7. 'The Small People'
Maybe something got lost in translation. But when BP Chairman Svanberg spoke after Wednesday's meeting between BP executives and President Obama, the Swedish-born businessman declared: "I care about the small people. I hear comments sometimes that large oil companies are greedy companies or don't care, but that is not the case at BP. We care about the small people." Watch it here.

He later apologized.

Comments (22) | Join the Conversation!

June 17, 2010 7:41 PM   

There is something refreshingly honest about these asses. In their utter failure to play the "suck up and pretend contrition" game, they are showing us exactly who they are: people who could not care less about the consequences of their actions as long as they and their cohorts continue to bring in obscene amounts of money.

AIG and Goldman, anyone? How about Enron and Silverado? Why the hell do we keep being shocked! Shocked! when the simple reality of raw capitalism is thrown in our faces yet again?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

June 18, 2010 11:17 AM    in reply to Lizskin

We live in a very interesting time in human history: apparently, the most hypocritical, greedy and amoral elements of our society - the sold-out politicians, multinational corporations, for-profit evangelists, etc. - are being inexplicably compelled to show their every reptilian, callous, insensitive, greedy and amoral stripe with everything they say and do. It's quite impressive, really - politican after politician, CEO after CEO coming out and basically, tacitly admitting, "yeah, we only care about money and power, f&$# the rest of y'all." Never before in history has this social, collective bowel movement reached such epic proportions...

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

June 20, 2010 7:43 AM    in reply to kunda311

You both took the words right out of my mouth. The world does seem to be an open sewer of capitalist greed. Where will we all end up?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

June 17, 2010 8:19 PM   

When you read all this stuff right in a row like this, it's hard to come to any conclusion about how these folks view themselves and their company other than, "We're a giant and influential energy company; why are you bothering us?" The level of disconnect to the "small people," arrogance, and political tone-deafness is absolutely epic.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

June 17, 2010 8:53 PM   

Out of all these, the one that I really didn't have a problem with Svanberg saying "little people." English isn't his first language and I understood the message that he was trying to convey, Now, before any trolls try to take my post out of context, I'm not condoning BP's actions and I'm not letting them off the hook, I'm just trying to convey my thoughts on the comment.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

June 17, 2010 9:19 PM   

the Big People dont give a Big Phuck.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

June 17, 2010 9:41 PM   

This is a magnificent grouping of 7 snapshots delineating the thinking pattern of the psychopathy of the wealthy.

We are so important and utterly above all of this dust up.

But fear not, we do care for you little people, you insignificant mouth breathers, you working fools, in your little hovels along the coast.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

June 17, 2010 10:08 PM   

THe abhorrent language from Heyward, Dudley and the other executives at BP is typical from corporate criminals. They have no concern other than the ten of millions in profits they continue to make every day - even after the spill. Anything or anyone that comes in the way of this is expendable.

http://www.facebook.com/campaigncorner

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

JKT

user-pic

June 17, 2010 10:56 PM   

8. "BP notes the fall in its share price in US trading last night. The company is not aware of any reason which justifies this share price movement."

http://www.bp.com/genericarticle.do?categoryId=2012968&contentId=7062827

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

June 18, 2010 12:54 AM    in reply to JKT

Definitely that should have been on the list.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

June 17, 2010 11:05 PM   

There is a straight forward logical progression at play here.

The only way these guys will ever start being sincere is if they're forced to be. From their point of view, it costs them little to lie but it costs them a great deal if they're honest. They are first and foremost a corporation and their utmost responsibility belongs to the shareholders. Lying saves them the most money for those shareholders, therefore they have to lie.

They're abhorrent, but at least they're consistent.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

June 18, 2010 1:14 PM    in reply to Bright Creature

One might even argue they have a moral responsibility to their shareholders -- from the corporation's perspective, doing anything in the interest of profits is not only justifiable, but morally required. It is the very purpose of their existence.

This, of course, lies in direct conflict with the moral goals of organisms with other goals, such as, you know...an uncontaminated environment. The health of their children, etc.

There are only two solutions to such an intractable problem: either you appeal to the corporation's values -- that is, regulate them with fines and such; or you destroy them. Unfortunately, the latter will never happen (in my lifetime, anyway), and the former is, as evidenced by the current situation in the Gulf, being done terribly.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

June 20, 2010 7:47 AM    in reply to Michael

OR third option: they destroy themselves, like Enron had done.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

June 21, 2010 2:54 PM    in reply to Bright Creature

yes, and who can make that happen? A strong government, of course. People who think less government control will make companies more responsible should look at other places with disasters. Bhopal, at the abandoned but still chemical-rich Union Carbide plant, has been 20 years continuing to kill people and blight lives, without a clean-up or even the removal of barrels of chemicals. The Nigerian Delta. etc., etc.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

June 18, 2010 2:11 AM   

Before the fall of the old Soviet Union the Communist Party lavishly rewarded the elite while leaving the "small" people with little more than empty promises backed by the heavy hand of the State. The Soviet Military/Industrial/Security apparatus gobbled up most the State production -- war (expansionism) was their most lucrative export.

During their ill-advised invasion of Afghanistan in the eighties, (a necessary distraction from widespread economic woes), Chernobyl imploded spreading a radioactive plume over much of the Ukraine and Europe.

Those two events -- the Afghan invasion and the irradiation of a huge bit of the Soviet Union -- evolved from extensive political corruption. Combined they undermined the political legitimacy of the State. The Soviet elite could no longer hide their incompetence, systemic nepotism, and hugely disparate privilege with propaganda, State managed news, and frantic, dogmatic appeals to Marxist ideology.

We might keep this parallel in mind as we watch the slow, agonizing death of the southeast US coastal areas. Benzine may be a bit less lethal than radiation, but no less carcinogenic.

Despite Hayward's apparently contrite (and uninformative) testimony today, the more interesting and informative performance belonged to the members of the Congressional committee. Their outraged theatrics demonstrated their institutional impotence. What else do they have in exchange for their State sanctioned privileges but empty bluster?

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

June 18, 2010 9:54 AM    in reply to Milton Wiltmellow

a Ghazal

Atlas, Shrug

We cheered and clapped when Atlas finally shrugged.
When to his mountain hide-away he humbly shrugged.

Dagney's trains ground to a slow and steady halt.
The unwashed unworthy masses dumbly shrugged.

Waves of factories sputtered closed enormous doors.
Stunned demise diminished memory swiftly shrugged.

In John Galt's poisonous post-industrial wasteland,
Earth coughed a sigh and simply slyly shrugged.

Seas rose, land shook, mud slid, skies darkened.
Atlas trembled as he was summarily shrugged.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

June 18, 2010 1:27 PM    in reply to Milton Wiltmellow

Well said.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

June 18, 2010 2:48 AM   

So how do we feel about the phrase, the "common man" these days? Heck, people who work for a living on the gulf are small people; we're all pretty small, really.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

June 18, 2010 8:52 AM    in reply to Rockridge

Small people got no reason to live . . .

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

June 20, 2010 7:50 AM    in reply to SqueakyRat

Nice homage to Randy Newman!! :-)

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?

June 18, 2010 1:57 PM   

I'm an American who worked for BP in the '80's and '90s. The then Chairman, Robert Horton, gave an interview for the Cleveland Plain Dealer talking about how the company was so successful in managing its "diversity." I was in Houston and saw a completely different picture, so I wrote a diplomatic letter to the Chairman explaining that BP had plenty of problems with diversity and long way to go to achieve the stted goal. I was in transition to a posting in London at the time, and upon my arrival I was summoned to the office of the chief executive of my business stream. I thought perhaps all newly posted personnel get a welcome meeting, but no, it was about "the letter". He had been told that the chairman was incensed - not about the issue I wrote about - but that I had written the letter at all. The chairman and staff had a 45 min meeting on what should be done about this American letter-writer. In the end I was "educated" that "it is just not done. You don't write letters to the Chairman". Maybe they'd be doing better now responding to Congress and President Obama if they had learned how to repsond to one mid-level American in 1990.

Reply | Flag Abuse

Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?