Bachelor Project 2014
BP's oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico 2010
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Aalborg University
6th semester
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
Resume:
Dette bachelorprojekt omhandler virksomheden BP, som i april 2010 var skyld i det største
olieudslip i verden, da en boreplatform eksploderede i den mexicanske golf og dræbte 11
personer og sårede flere. Efter eksplosionen brændte boreplatformen i 36 timer hvorefter den
sank ned i dybet, men olieudgravningsbrønden var ikke forseglet og millioner af olie flød ud i
vandet. Først fire måneder efter ulykken, lykkedes det BP at forsegle oliebrønden, først med
mudder, og da det var sikkert, at dette kunne holde, blev den forseglet permanent med cement.
Da det var BP, som stod for boringen, var det også dette firma der blev holdt ansvarlig for
ulykken, og virksomheden var derfor nødt til at anvende krisekommunikation for at undgå, at
virksomhedens image skulle tage skade. Udover krisekommunikation blev der også anvendt
imagegenoprettelsesstrategier, da virksomhedens image var truet på grund af olieudslippet.
Projektet anvender den hermeneutiske metode inkluderende den hermeneutiske cirkel. I
hermeneutikken er der to centrale begreber, fortolkning og mening, hvor man bevæger sig fra
forståelse af enkelte dele af en tekst såsom ord og sætninger til forståelsen af teksten i sin
helhed. I hermeneutikken er Gadamer essentiel med hans forståelsesbegreber, forforståelse og
fordomme, hvilket betyder, at vi som menneske altid har en forforståelse og fordomme om et
emne, før vi fortolker på det, og derved opnår vi en ny forståelse for emnet. I følge Gadamer
kommer ingen igennem et emne uden at have forforståelse og fordomme. Udover den
hermeneutiske metode, vil den kvalitative metode blive anvendt, hvor flere definitioner på
denne går på, at kvalitative metoder er metoder, som fokuserer på kontekst, det unikke og det
menings- og forståelsesorienterede, og dermed er de primære metoder, dem som ikke
kvantificeres ud fra tal og statistikker.
Projektet er baseret på tre forskellige teorier; krisekommunikation, imagegenoprettelse og
kulturteori for at forstå, hvordan der skulle kommunikeres til befolkningen i Amerika, som
var det land krisen primært havde indflydelse på, eftersom ulykken skete i den mexicanske
golf. I krisekommunikationen blev flere af teoriens understrategier anvendt såsom
benægtelsesstrategi
hvor
virksomheden
skød
skylden
på
andre
virksomheder,
formindskelsesstrategier såsom bortforklaring og retfærdiggørelse, hvor BPs daværende
administrerende direktør hævdede, at i forhold til hvor stort farvand ulykken skete i, ville
selve omfanget og skaderne som følge af krisen være minimale. Derudover udtalte BP, at det
ikke var meningen ulykken skulle ske, men at den skete på grund af fejl fra flere sider end BP.
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
Sidst men ikke mindst blev der gjort brug af genopbygningsstrategier i form af kompensation
og undskyldninger, hvor BP kompenserede de ofre, der måtte menes at være påvirket af
krisen, enten ved dødsfald eller ved tabt indtjening for personer og forretninger i området.
Derudover tog BP hele ansvaret for krisen med en offentlig undskyldning med løfte om at
forsøge at afværge lignende kriser i fremtiden. Af imagegenoprettelsesstrategier blev der
brugt benægtelse, hvori virksomheden forsøgte at flytte skylden over på andre virksomheder.
Der blev forsøgt at reducere krisens omfang ved at formidle ofrene for ulykken igennem
kompensationer. I august 2010 blev der fundet en måde, hvorpå hullet i oliebrønden kunne
lukkes med operation "static kill", og dermed blev der fundet en løsning på krisen. Dette tiltag
hører under strategien korrigering, da denne strategi går ud på, at virksomheden forsøger at
rette op på dens fejl ved enten at løse problemet eller forhindre, at problemet genopstår. Den
sidste strategi, der blev anvendt under imagegenoprettelsesstrategien, er bøn om tilgivelse,
hvor BP offentligt kom med en undskyldning for krisen og samtidig lovede, at virksomheden
ville gøre sit for, at lignende ikke skulle ske igen.
I følge Edward T. Hall og hans kulturteori bryder amerikanerne sig ikke om, at tingene bliver
sagt indirekte, da de foretrækker, at ting kommunikeres direkte. Derudover foretrækker de
hurtige svar, når der opstår problemer og helst også at problemerne løses hurtigt. Dette
hænger godt sammen med den måde, hvorpå BP kommunikerede til det amerikanske folk på,
da der allerede var en handlingsplan for krisen klar dagen efter eksplosionen på
boreplatformen. Kommunikationen der blev udsendt fra virksomheden var direkte og
forståelig, hvori de nødvendige informationer om krisen fremgik. Med deres reklame, som
blev trykt i The New York Times, var kommunikationen også klar og tydelig, og det var
blandt andet i denne, at BP erklærede, at virksomheden fortsat ville tage det fulde ansvar for
oprydningen efter krisen.
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
Table of content
1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1
2. Problem statement .................................................................................................................. 1
3. Methodology........................................................................................................................... 2
3.1 Hermeneutic ...................................................................................................................... 2
3.2 Qualitative method ............................................................................................................ 3
4. Presentation of theories .......................................................................................................... 4
4.1 Crisis communication - Timothy Coombs ........................................................................ 4
4.1.1 Crisis definition .......................................................................................................... 4
4.1.2 Crisis management/crisis communication .................................................................. 5
4.1.3 Crisis Response Strategies ......................................................................................... 5
4.2 Image restoration theory - William L. Benoit ................................................................... 8
4.2.1 Types of restoration strategies................................................................................... 8
4.3 Cultural theory - Edward T. Hall .................................................................................... 11
4.3.1 High vs. low context ................................................................................................ 11
4.3.2 The American culture ............................................................................................... 11
5. Presentation of empirical data .............................................................................................. 13
5.1 BP's website .................................................................................................................... 13
5.1.1 Press releases ............................................................................................................ 13
5.2 Websites .......................................................................................................................... 13
5.3 Media .............................................................................................................................. 14
5.3.1 Articles from during the crisis .................................................................................. 15
5.3.2 Articles from after the crisis ..................................................................................... 16
5.4 Advertisement from BP .................................................................................................. 17
6. Analysis ................................................................................................................................ 18
6.1 BP case ............................................................................................................................ 18
6.1.1 History ...................................................................................................................... 18
6.1.2 The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico 2010 .................................................................. 18
6.2 BP's Crisis Communication ............................................................................................ 19
6.3 BP's Image restoration strategies .................................................................................... 23
6.4 Evaluation of the crisis communication ............................................................................. 25
6.4.1 Evaluation of the strategies .......................................................................................... 26
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
6.4.2 Evaluation of the communication (Hall) ..................................................................... 28
7. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................ 29
8. Bibliography ......................................................................................................................... 31
9. Appendices ........................................................................................................................... 34
9.1 Appendix 1 - Advertisement from BP "We will get it done. We will make this right" . 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
1. Introduction
This assignment will be written on the basis of BP's oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico that took
place in April 2010. During and after the oil spill, BP had to use different crisis strategies to
prevent any possible damages to the company's image.
The subject of the assignment is chosen due to the interest I find in knowing which strategies
BP used during the crisis. Additionally, I would like to investigate how effective the strategies
were after the crisis in an evaluation. When a crisis strikes, it is important that a company has
some kind of guidelines to follow to get through the crisis in the most effective way without
serious image damages. If the company does not have such kind of guidelines, it can have
several consequences for the company in the future, as it risks that its image will be damaged.
If the image is not directly damaged, the stakeholders of the company will often remember
how the company handled the crisis, and if they do not believe that the crisis was handled
well enough, they can affect the company in a negative way and thereby threaten the image.
This is also one of the reasons why this area has been chosen, as I find it interesting to see
what a company does when a crisis strikes and how the company manage getting through the
crisis, and even more important, how BP managed to get through the oil spill back in April
2010.
In addition to that, this topic is relevant to write about, as the crisis was caused by one of the
biggest oil giants in the world and therefore, everybody know the company and might have an
opinion about it, and this oil spill is categorised as the biggest in the world ever.
To maintain the main thread through the entire assignment, the analysis will be divided into
chapters. Firstly, the history of the company will be introduced to the reader, and then
background knowledge of the crisis will be presented. After the general presentation of the
company and the crisis, I will continue to the first strategy analysis, the crisis communication.
Afterwards, the image restoration theories will be analysed and lastly, there will be an
evaluation of the crisis communication.
2. Problem statement
Which strategies did BP use during the oil spill in 2010 to maintain BP’s image towards the
stakeholders, and how did BP use these strategies?
Page 1 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
3. Methodology
In this section, the methodology of the assignment will be presented. The expression of
hermeneutic and qualitative methods will be explained, as it is those areas I use in this
assignment. The methodology is an important area to cover, as it here is described how the
assignment is composed.
3.1 Hermeneutic
I have chosen to use the hermeneutic approach, including the hermeneutic circle. The
hermeneutic approach interprets human actions in a context, where it is interesting to examine
why some people are different. Hermeneutic has two central concepts namely interpretation
and opinion (Collin and Køppe 2012, 140) and the hermeneutic approach therefore moves
between the understanding of "parts" of a text as sentences and word, and the understanding
of the entire text in full (Collin and Køppe 2012, 145). Hermeneutic deals with the
meaningful and thereby the personal concerning can be understood from the term expression.
Furthermore, a comprehensive determination of the meaningful area from the term
intentionality, is according to Mogens Pahuus that in every single activity there is, we are
dealing with something, for instance to act is to do something for someone or with something
(Collin and Køppe 2012, 141).
Moreover, Gadamer has an understanding concept in which understanding is composed by
"pre-understanding" and "prejudice". People have a pre-understanding about a topic,
meaning that there always is a previous understanding beforehand our present understanding.
Our understanding and interpretation of meaning is therefore always premised on an actual
given understanding of the world. Prejudice concerns the " luggage" that someone brings in
his or hers understanding process of the world. However, prejudice is not as when we
generally speak of prejudice with something condemnatory; In Gadamer's understanding
concept, prejudice is something that is basic to our understanding and interpretation of for
instance a text or conversation. People are characterised with a preconceived meaning of the
world and will therefore interpret the world without any kind of assumption (Fuglsang, Olsen
and Rasborg 2013, 301). In other words, prejudices are propositions we have made
beforehand, as we cannot understand, express or interpret the world, if we have not made
ourselves some prepositions beforehand (Fuglsang, Olsen and Rasborg 2013, 301).
Page 2 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
3.2 Qualitative method
The qualitative method is essential to use in this project, due to the analysis on the crisis in the
Gulf of Mexico with focus on strategies to maintain BP's image after the crisis.
When looking at the qualitative method, there are different definitions describing the method,
whereas one of the definitions is thus; "a circumstanced activity that spot the observer in the
world. They consist of a number of interpretative material practices, which makes the world
visible. These practices transform the world to a number of representations, including field
notes, interviews, conversations, photography's, recordings and memo's" (Collin and Køppe
2012, 279). Nevertheless, this definition is a bit abstract as the qualitative method according
to this is an activity, which creates meaning in form of representations or expressions of the
world, and this definition is not attached to any specific field (Collin and Køppe 2012, 279).
Another definition of the qualitative method is "qualitative research is any kind of research
which not use statistics or another quantification as main source to the empirical results"
(Collin and Køppe 2012, 280), because the qualitative method first and foremost focuses on
the unique, the context dependent and the meanings oriented and understanding oriented
(Fuglsang, Olsen and Rasborg 2013, 318).
Among other things, the qualitative method deals with empirical studies that collects different
data and makes an analysis of the individual examples and then gathers an understanding
hereof. Looking at the qualitative method rather than the quantitative method, the qualitative
method is defined by data that is not ruled by statistics and numbers, as mentioned above.
When looking at data collected by others, it is always important to stay critical towards the
author of the data as this person is more involved with the subject and therefore might have a
personal opinion that is clearly shown in the collected data (Rasmussen, Østergaard, and
Andersen 2010, 92-112).
The qualitative method will be used in this assignment in form of document study, such as
public articles from different newspapers about the oil spill to get an angle to the crisis from
the media during the crisis. Moreover, my qualitative methods include the use of BP's website
to get the company's view of the crisis and a printed advertisement from BP about the spill. I
have chosen to use different kinds of data in the assignment in order to secure that all relevant
areas of the subject are covered and in this way make sure that the problem statement can be
answered.
Page 3 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
4. Presentation of theories
In this section, I will present the included theories in the assignment and how the different
theories will be used.
This project will be based on three different theories; crisis communication, image restoration
and cultural theory, which I have chosen to use as they support each other in a very useful
way. Additionally, when using crisis communication it is obvious to bring an image
restoration too, as a company, which needs to use crisis communication usually also needs to
use image restoration theories.
4.1 Crisis communication - Timothy Coombs
Crisis communication is important when a crisis hits a company; if the company does not
have a well arranged crisis communication, the image of the company may encounter great
consequences. When the oil spill happened in the Gulf of Mexico, BP had to employ a lot of
crisis communication to prevent that the accident influenced the image, which is why this
theory is chosen to be a part of this assignment; to analyse how crisis communication was
exploited during the crisis. Furthermore, this theory is relevant as it can be connected to the
analysis of the image restoration theory by Benoit, which will be introduced later.
4.1.1 Crisis definition
W. Timothy Coombs defines a crisis thus; “A crisis is the perception of an unpredictable
event that threatens important expectancies of stakeholders and can seriously impact an
organization’s performance and generate negative outcomes” (Coombs 2012, 2). When a
crisis hit a company, it can disrupt and affect every single part of the organisation, if there is
no clear guidelines on how the crisis is handled (Coombs 2012, 3). It are only few that would
believe that an industrial accident can go under the term 'crisis'; nonetheless, it is in reality the
company's stakeholders who are the judges of whether a crisis actually is a crisis or not. If the
stakeholders reach the conclusion that a company is in a crisis, it will actually be in a crisis as
the stakeholders therefore will act like the crisis exist (Coombs 2012, 2). As mentioned in the
introduction to this section, it can have several consequences for an organisation if a crisis
strikes, for instance financial losses or reputational damages (Coombs 2012, 4).
Page 4 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
4.1.2 Crisis management/crisis communication
According to Coombs, crisis management can be defined in this way; “Crisis management
represents a set of factors designed to combat crises and to lessen the actual damage
inflicted. Put another way, it seeks to prevent or lessen the negative outcomes of a crisis and
thereby protect the organization, stakeholders, and industry from harm. Crisis management
has evolved from emergency preparedness, and drawing from that base, comprises a set of
four interrelated factors: prevention, preparation, response and revision” (Coombs 2012, 5).
The first factor 'prevention' is employed to avoid a crisis, and it is in this 'dimension' the
actions to prevent a crisis are composed. For instance, a company is able to recall a product
from the market due to discovered defects in it (Coombs 2012, 5).
The second factor is 'reparation', which is where an organisation chooses a crisis management
team and spokespersons and then trains them to handle crises. Also the crisis communication
system is refined and crises portfolios are created (Coombs 2012, 5).
In the third factor 'response', an organisation is testing the crisis communication. Here
everything is checked so a company is ready if a crisis appears and some companies even
simulates a crisis to test the spokespersons, team members and the communication system
(Coombs 2012, 5).
The fourth and last factor is 'revision' and this is where an organisation evaluates on how the
crisis was handled. It is also here the company evaluates what was done right, and what was
done wrong. 'Revision' is a self-evaluation for companies meant to improve the crisis
communication of a company and the response to crises and not to mention the handling and
management of crises (Coombs 2012, 6).
4.1.3 Crisis Response Strategies
Crisis response strategies are a part of the crisis communication and according to Coombs, it
can be defined thus; "Crisis response strategies represent the actual responses an
organization uses to address a crisis” (Coombs 2012, 154).
The crisis response strategies involve both verbal aspects (the spoken word), and non verbal
aspects (actions which are made to remedy a crisis) (Coombs 2012, 154). In the beginning,
crisis response strategies were used as apologia or ways of using communication to protect an
organisation's image (Coombs 2012, 154). However, the strategies have grown to consist of
Page 5 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
more than only apologia, as they were expanded by examining the concept of accounts.
Coombs defines accounts in this way; “Accounts are those statements people use to explain
their behaviour when that behaviour is called into question” (Coombs 2012, 154).
The crisis response strategies include ten different strategies which can be used during a
crisis. However, not all the strategies will be relevant to this assignment and will therefore not
be described in this section. This section will only include a description of the strategies,
which are found relevant to this topic. The crisis response strategies are a bit similar to
Benoit's image restoration theory, however, the crisis response strategies are to use before the
image is damaged and Benoit's theory is when the image has been affected by a crisis or is
threatened (Coombs 2012, 154). The ten strategies Coombs has gathered are listed below to
get an overview of the strategies:
Strategy
Denial Posture
Diminishment
Posture
Rebuilding Posture
Bolstering Posture
Attacking the Accuser
Denial
Scapegoating
Excusing
Justification
Compensation
Apology
Reminding
Ingratiation
Victimage
Figure 1: Crisis Response Strategies, by posture (Coombs 2012, 155)
As mentioned before, this section will only include a description of the strategies that are
found useful to the assignment. Therefore, it is only the 'denial posture', 'diminishment
posture' and the 'rebuilding posture' that are enlarged, as it was those strategies BP employed
to avoid the image being damaged when the crisis stroke.
First strategy is 'denial posture' and consists of three strategies; 'attacking the accuser',
'denial' and 'scapegoating'. In 'attacking the accuser' the company will confront the group
that claims that a crisis exists, and the manager might threat the accuser with e.g. a lawsuit if
the claims do not stop. 'Denial' is pretty much as the word express, a denial from the
manager. The company will deny that there is a crisis and his response might include an
Page 6 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
explanation of why there is no crisis. The last strategy in the denial posture is 'scapegoating'.
In this strategy, the company will blame another group outside the company for the crisis, and
in this way remove the responsibility from itself (Coombs 2012, 155).
The next strategy is 'diminishment posture' and it consists of two different possible strategies
'excusing' and 'justification'. The diminishment posture try to reduce the attribution of the
control over the crisis and the negative effects the crisis might have caused. If the attributions
for control of the exact crisis are viewed less negatively towards the stakeholders, the threat of
damaging the image of the company is reduced (Coombs 2012, 156). 'Excusing' is when a
company try to minimize the company's responsibility for the crisis, for instance by denying
any intention to do harm. Furthermore, the company can claim that it had absolutely no
control of the event that later led to the crisis (Coombs 2012, 155). A company can also
choose to use 'justification' where a company try to minimize the size of the crisis by
minimizing the perceived damages, which are associated with the crisis. The response in this
strategy can include a stating from the company that there were no serious damages or
injuries. The company can even choose to state that the victims deserved what they got
(Coombs 2012, 155).
The third crisis response strategy that will be included in this section is called the 'rebuilding
posture'. This strategy is the one with most focus on improving the reputation after a crisis,
and all words spoken in this context are to benefit the stakeholders and to offset the negative
aspects that might be in a crisis (Coombs 2012, 156). The strategy consists of two strategies
'compensation' and 'apology'. Compensation is when an organisation provides compensation
to the affected victims of a crisis. The next strategy, apology, is the most complex and
controversial strategy of the different crisis response strategies as it distinguish between full
apology and partial apology; if the company gives a full apology, the company must
acknowledge the crisis and accept all its responsibility. Additionally, the company must
promise not to repeat the crisis and express its regrets and concerns to the victims (Coombs
2012, 156). Yet, a company is not forced to give a full apology but can chose only to give a
partial apology. The difference between full and partial apology is in the legal liability; if the
company accept its full responsibility of the crisis, it is forced to pay in court if any kind of
lawsuit is made towards the company (Coombs 2012, 156).
Page 7 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
4.2 Image restoration theory - William L. Benoit
During and after a crisis it is important for companies to know how the image can be restored,
if it is in danger of being damaged. If the crisis response strategies were not enough to avoid
the company's image from being damaged, the image restoration theory can be used. During
the oil spill, BP had large prospects of damaging the image, as more people were killed and
the company had a hard time stopping the leak. Therefore, BP needed to make a plan for how
the image could be restored. This section will describe how the image restoration theory
functions and which different strategies there are.
4.2.1 Types of restoration strategies
In the image restoration theory, a company can use five different strategies when the image is
threatened, and these strategies are; denial, evading of responsibility, reducing offensiveness
of event, corrective action and mortification (Benoit 1995, 95). Some of the strategies contain
a new set of strategies that can be used, and the different strategies will therefore be listed
below in a table to get an overview of it.
Strategy
Denial
Evading of Responsibility
Reducing Offensiveness of Event
Simple denial
Shifting the blame
Provocation
Defeasibility
Accident
Good intentions
Bolstering
Minimization
Differentiation
Transcendence
Attack accuser
Compensation
Corrective Action
Mortification
Figure 2: Image Restoration Strategies (Benoit 1995, 95)
As it is shown in the table, the first image restoration strategy is denial. When a company is
forced to defend itself, it can choose to deny the accident. The company can choose to say that
Page 8 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
the accident did not happen or that the concerned company was not involved in the accident
(Benoit 1995, 75). In denial, there are two strategies a company can use; simple denial or
shifting the blame. Simple denial is when the company denies to be involved in the accident
and shifting the blame is when a company places the blame at another company (Benoit 1995,
75).
The second strategy a company can utilize is 'Evading of Responsibility'. This strategy can be
used by those who are unable to deny their act in the crisis, as it tries to evade or reduce the
apparent responsibility for the crisis (Benoit 1995, 76). According to Benoit, there are four
variants of this strategy; provocation, defeasibility, accident and good intentions. When a
company use provocation it argues that it has been provoked to act the way the company did
and that the company has been scapegoat for others actions (Johansen and Frandsen 2008,
208). Defeasibility is when a company explain that the act was caused because the company
was not well-informed or that it did not have full control over the situation, and others
therefore take part in the responsibility. Accident is, as the name indicates when it is argued
that the act was due to unfortunate circumstances or a regular accident, which the company
has no responsibility for or in best case only has partial responsibility for (Johansen and
Frandsen 2008, 208). The last strategy in evading of responsibility is the good intentions; in
this strategy, it is argued that the actions were done with the best intentions (Johansen and
Frandsen 2008, 208).
Benoit's next strategy is "Reducing Offensiveness of Event", and has the purpose to tone
down an attack of a company and make the negative impacts less. The strategy contains six
subtype strategies, which are; bolstering, minimization, differentiation, transcendence, attack
accuser and compensation (Johansen and Frandsen 2008, 208). In the bolstering strategy, the
focus is on diverting the attention to the crisis by highlighting the positive aspects in the
company or describing previous positive actions from the company. Minimization is a
strategy where the company defend itself, by stating that the action was not as bad as it looks
like, and by that it is trying to tone down the actual crisis. The third strategy differentiation is
about comparing the companies’ actions with actions performed by other companies. In this
way, the company shows the stakeholders that similar actions performed by others have been
worse than this one (Johansen and Frandsen 2008, 208). When using transcendence, the
company will try to transfer the action to another context. For instance, the company could
state that it was done for the best of the society, as with Robin Hood, who helps the poor in
Page 9 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
the society and is thus not a thief. The fifth strategy attack accuser, is about making a
counterattack and weakens the stakeholders accuses and thereby divert the attention from the
involved company (Johansen and Frandsen 2008, 208).
The last strategy in reducing offensiveness of event is compensation. In this strategy, a
company tries to reduce the attack by offering some kind of compensation, for instance
compensation to the victims of an accident. By doing this, the stakeholders might not judge
the company as hard as when having done nothing for the victims (Johansen and Frandsen
2008, 208).
The fourth strategy in the image restoration theory is "Corrective Action", and in this strategy,
there are no subtypes of strategies. This strategy is about responding the attack by trying to fix
the problem and the company can either correct the problem by solving it or make sure that it
will not happen again. In this theory, it is possible to correct the problem without taking
responsibility for the crisis (Johansen and Frandsen 2008, 209). The last strategy in the image
restoration theory is "Mortification" and has, as the corrective action, no subtype strategies.
The strategy is when the company accept its responsibilities in the crisis, apologises and asks
for forgiveness (Johansen and Frandsen 2008, 209).
According to Benoit, the corrective action and mortification is often used together. However,
other strategies can also be combined in the same case, as many companies deny the accident
in the beginning but ends up giving an apology to the stakeholders (Johansen and Frandsen
2008, 209). In addition, analyses from Benoit have shown that most companies make use of
more strategies to correct a threatened image, and using only one strategy such as denial will
not alone be enough to restore a good image (Johansen and Frandsen 2008, 209-210).
Moreover, some of the strategies are appropriate in the beginning of a crisis while other might
be better in the middle of a crisis. Nevertheless, there are also examples of companies that
have only employed one strategy throughout a crisis and kept the good image. When working
with image restoration strategies, it is important to communicate which plans that will be
made to prevent a similar situation in the future whether the company is responsible or not
(Johansen and Frandsen 2008, 210).
Page 10 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
4.3 Cultural theory - Edward T. Hall
In this project, cultural theory is essential to use, as when a company communicates a
message, it is important to know how to communicate. When the crisis happened in the Gulf
of Mexico, BP was to communicate to America and the company therefore had to make a
communication, which was adjusted, to the American people. I have chosen to make use of
Edward T. Hall as my cultural theorist, as he describes the differences between cultures in a
very useful manner to this assignment. The theory will be used to analyse whether the
communication was proper addressed to the American people or not, and what could have
been done in a different way. This theory has a lot of interesting knowledge about the
Americans; however, it is only the most important parts of the theory that will be included.
4.3.1 High vs. low context
According to Hall, context is the information that is surrounding an event and can give
meaning to that specific event. Context can be compared on a scale from high context to low
context (Hall p. 6). Hall defines the different contexts thus: "A high context (HC)
communication or message is one in which most of the information is already in the person,
while very little is in the coded, explicit, transmitted part of the message. A low context (LC)
communication is just the opposite; i.e., the mass of the information is vested in the explicit
code" (Hall and Hall 1990, 6). However, in this assignment, the low context is essential as the
American people belong to the group of low context people. Being connected to the low
context culture means that people might have several connections but of shorter duration, and
every time low context people interact with other people, they need detailed background
information before the interaction (Hall and Hall 1990, 7).
4.3.2 The American culture
When dealing with the American culture, some things are interesting to know about the
culture. One of the things that are good to know is that most of the American population are
monochronic, especially in business. This means that all time is scheduled so people have the
ability to concentrate on one thing at a time (Hall and Hall 1990, 140). Things are taken care
of in the present and Americans do not want to wait, they want to see results now, quick
answers and quick solutions. The Americans are not used to wait long periods of time for
making a decision and get anxious when the decisions are not made immediately.
Page 11 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
Furthermore, the American school system is for example very different from the German and
French school system or just any European school system at all. Studies have shown that
American children spend more time watching television than they spend in school (Hall and
Hall 1990, 143). Moreover, the curriculum is much less demanding than other countries,
especially when it comes to mathematics, sciences and languages according to Hall (Hall and
Hall 1990, 143).
According to Hall, Americans prefer directness in communication although they are not as
frank as the Germans would be, when looking at the communication style. Hall believes that
the American people often are uncomfortable with indirectness, and sometimes they even
miss nonverbal cues and hints (Hall and Hall 1990, 146).
From this theory, it is possible to conclude the importance of knowing how the American
culture behaves when communication with the Americans. As seen in the theory, Americans
do not want to wait for solutions; they want it now. Therefore, BP had to have a solution to
the problems prepared already in the first days of the crisis as it was important for the
Americans to see what the company intended to do.
The communication needs to be adjusted to their educational level, as it is no use to
communicate in a higher level than the receiver will be able to understand. When looking at
the Americans level of education the communication needs to be hereafter; simple and easy to
understand, of course not as easy that the receiver believes that the communicator ridicules
them, but in an understandable level. Furthermore, the communication needs to be direct so
there cannot be any misunderstandings, as the Americans do not prefer this kind of
communication; they want directness as mentioned above.
Page 12 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
5. Presentation of empirical data
This section will contain an overview of which empirical data that are to be found in this
assignment and how it will be used. In addition, the sources of the empirical data will be
described to the reader and why this material is relevant for this exact project.
5.1 BP's website
In this assignment, I have chosen to use BP's website to obtain information from the source
itself. On the website, several pieces of information about the crisis can be found. However,
the primary focus from this website will be information about the company such as the
history, which is to be used in the part that is describing the company's history (BP 2010). The
history of the company is valuable to include to get a basic knowledge of the company that
the assignment is about.
Moreover, BP's website will be used when describing the crisis, as the website contains
information about what happened on that day of April 20, 2010 (BP 2014).
5.1.1 Press releases
I will use press releases published by BP from when the oil spill happened and to the last
efforts to stop the spill. The press releases will help me see how fast BP began its crisis
communication, how it was communicated and how much crisis communication it did.
The press releases are found on BP's own website and can therefore be used as a reliable but
subjective source, as the press releases are written by BP and therefore shows BP's view of
the crisis (BP 2010).
5.2 Websites
Different websites are included in the assignment, so the main focus will not only be on BP's
own website. The reason why other websites are included is to gain more knowledge of the
crisis and because there might be another kind of information on those websites. Furthermore,
the pages can give an overview of the oil spill and thereby be helpful in the section of history
and the crisis.
The websites are to be included in the description with the purpose of informing the reader of
what the crisis is about and what happened.
Page 13 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
5.3 Media
In the analysis, two or three media will be selected as the primary data source to analyse BP's
crisis communication, how the strategies were used and lastly to make an evaluation of
whether the crisis communication was well performed or it could have been improved.
However, there will first be an analysis of the crisis communication and the restoration theory
and not until these are analysed can the evaluation be done. The evaluation will be made from
the media response to the crisis when it was stopped, and by this, it is possible to analyse how
the reactions were to the crisis. If for instance the media wrote negatively about BP after the
crisis, it is most likely to think that the crisis communication was not the success BP had
hoped.
The first media that have been chosen is CNN, which is an American news channel that
covers the entire USA. CNN is one of the biggest channels in the USA and is acknowledged
in the states, which is one of the reasons why it has been chosen. Furthermore, it has been
chosen because of its proportions, it is able to reach a great deal of the population. Due to its
size, CNN has the ability to impact the population in a positive or negative way and therefore
also BP's image towards the stakeholders. CNN is a TV news channel, however the news are
also posted on the homepage of CNN as articles, which are those, the focus is on.
The second media I have chosen to use in the analyses of the crisis communication and
restoration theory is The New York Times. This paper is chosen for some of the same reasons
as CNN; due to its size of it, it will therefore cover a large area and by that affect several
people.
Both CNN and New York Times have covered the crisis deeply and there will be a large
access to different news articles about the case on these two websites. Besides, these websites
are very acknowledged in the states, giving them a sort of credibility to the population in the
USA.
I will select some articles from both media to use in the analyses. The articles will be selected
out of the articles relevance, as there are written several articles about this exact topic and
many of them will not be relevant to this assignment. The articles that are chosen to use in the
assignment, will be listed below in two categories; during the crisis and after the crisis. The
Page 14 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
articles from after the crisis are necessary when analysing whether the crisis communication
had any effect or not.
CNN and The New York Times will be included in all three analyses parts; crisis
communication, image restoration theory and evaluation. However, in the evaluation analysis,
a new media will be included to get three angles on this part. The third media is the Guardian,
which is a British media. The website will be used in the evaluation part, as this website after
the crisis has published a quit interesting article about the communication BP made during the
oil spill.
5.3.1 Articles from during the crisis
In this section, the reader will be informed of which articles from during the crisis I have
chosen to employ. These articles will be a part of the analyses on crisis communication and
image restoration strategy, together with the press releases from BP and the advertisement
“we will get it done. We will make this better”, which will be introduced in section 5.4. As
mentioned above, the articles are published on CNN’s website and in The New York Times. I
have chosen to use ten different articles, and these have been chosen as they contribute to the
assignment with useful statements from BP during the crisis that can indicate which strategies
the company used during the crisis. The statements are about compensations, apology
campaigns and so, which is why they are found relevant to this assignment. The articles that
are included in the assignment are listed below:
Articles from The New York Times:

BP's PR Blunders Mirror Exxon's, Appear Destined for Record Book (The New York
Times 2010).

BP Chief to Express Contrition in Remarks to Panel (The New York Times 2010).

Where BP’s Money Is Landing (The New York Times: Business Day. 2010).

BP Begins Test That Could Halt Oil Spill (The New York Times: U.S. 2010).

BP Is Criticized Over Oil Spill, but U.S. Missed Chances to Act (The New York
Times: U.S. 2010).
Page 15 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
Articles from CNN:

Oil response team demands BP transparency (CNN 2010).

BP apology campaign begins airing (CNN: U.S. 2010).

Outgoing BP executive blames 'many companies' for Gulf crisis (CNN: Europe 2010).

BP starts pouring cement into its undersea well (CNN: U.S. 2010).

BP to pour cement down crippled well in next step to seal it (CNN: U.S. 2010).
5.3.2 Articles from after the crisis
Articles written after the crisis are just as important as those written during the crisis. The
articles written after the crisis can give me a hint of whether the crisis communication had an
effect or not. These articles will therefore be included in the evaluation of the crisis
communication, where I will analyse on whether the communication were positive or
negative, and what could have been done in a different way. As mentioned earlier the articles,
which will be used in the evaluation part, are articles from The New York Times, CNN and
the Guardian. Four different articles will be included in this part, and they are chosen as they,
like the other articles, contain useful statements about the crisis communication from BP.
Nonetheless, these articles are, as mentioned in the beginning of the section, written and
published after the crisis to see what the media wrote about the company in the following
months.
Article from The New York Times:

Scientists Back Early Government Report on Gulf Spill (The New York Times:
Environment 2010)
Articles from CNN:

Public perception of BP affected spill response, Allen says (CNN: U.S. 2010).

BP oil well 'effectively dead' 5 months after spill began (CNN: U.S. 2010).
Article from the Guardian:

BP oil spill blamed on management and communication failures (The Guardian 2010).
Page 16 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
5.4 Advertisement from BP
An advertisement from BP will be utilized in the different analysing sections to get more
angles than the media in the analyses. The advertisement is called "We will get it done. We
will make this better" (see appendix 9.1) and was printed in The New York Times June 2
2010. It is an apology from BP and a description of how BP will handle the crisis.
Page 17 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
6. Analysis
In this section of the assignment, I will make my analyses and thereby finding answers to the
problem statement. The theories, which are presented in the theory section, will be employed
to make the different analyses. The analysis will be divided into different sections to ensure
that it is clear and understandable and it will start with a short presentation of the history of
BP and a presentation of the crisis.
6.1 BP case
This section of the analysis will consist of two parts; a brief history of the company and a
description of the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010.
6.1.1 History
British Petroleum (BP) was founded in 1909 by a German company. The name was chosen as
a marketing way in Britain. However, in 1917, it was sold to Anglo Persian and he had an
instant distribution network in the UK with the buy. Until 1954, the company was called
Anglo-Iranian Oil Company (BP 2014) but in 1954, the name was changed to the British
Petroleum Company (BP 2014).
In 2000 BP made a fusion with Amoco, ARCO, Castrol and later Aral, and BP has grown to
be a large global energy company, which is known all over the world (BP 2014).
6.1.2 The oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico 2010
On April 20 2010, a huge explosion on the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig were responsible to
11 men's death, while others were injured. In addition, gallons of oil ran into the Gulf of
Mexico and killed a large amount of animals (BP 2014). The drilling rig sank into the water
after it had been burning for 36 hours. The leak in the oil well was not stopped before August
4 2010, which was four months after the explosion and this oil spill is therefore categorized as
the biggest oil disaster ever, as 210 million gallons oil ran into the water in those months
(CNN: World 2014).
BP got the responsibility for the accident as it was this company that was drilling after oil.
The company tried to do several things to stop the spill, among other things placing a funnel
of metal on top of the well to collect some of the oil from the water.
Page 18 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
In June 2010, President Barack Obama gave a speech stating that BP had to pay all damages
after the oil spill (BBC 2010), and he made a six month prohibition against assigning oil
companies new underwater oil licenses. However, the prohibition was lifted by a New
Orleans federal judge (Bloomberg 2010). After this statement, BP declares that the company
will pay compensation to private people and companies. Furthermore, BP made a fund to
compensate for lost wages of profits, personal injuries or even death (BBC: World 2010).
6.2 BP's Crisis Communication
In this section of the assignment, I will analyse BP's crisis communication. To analyse this
section, I am using the theory of crisis communication and my empirical data.
As written in section 4.1.1 a crisis is defined thus by Coombs; “A crisis is the perception of an
unpredictable event that threatens important expectancies of stakeholders and can seriously
impact an organization’s performance and generate negative outcomes". From this statement,
it is clear that the explosion on the drilling rig April 20 2010 can be defined as a crisis, as it
was an unpredictable event that could threaten the company and generate a negative outcome
for BP.
When the crisis stroke and 11 people were killed, BP had to do something to communicate the
situation to the world and to avoid the company's image of being damaged. The strategy to do
this was by using crisis communication. As mentioned earlier the theory of crisis
communication consists of 10 crisis response strategies, but it was only few of them which
were used during the crisis, and these are; scapegoating, excusing, justification, compensation
and apology, which will be analysed later.
The first public information from BP about the crisis was made on April 20 2010 in a press
release from the company, in which BP confirms that there has been an explosion on the
drilling rig. Nevertheless, in this first press release BP has not yet started the crisis
communication, as it only is a confirmation to the public concerning an accident (BP 2010).
On April 21 2010, there was a response strategy ready from BP in a press release informing
what the company aim to do to stop the oil leak (BP 2010). According to Hall, the American
people want to have fast solutions to problems and a plan of what a company will do to solve
the problem, and this might be the reason why the response strategy was published so fast by
Page 19 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
BP.
As mentioned in the beginning of this section, one of the response strategies BP used was the
denial posture scapegoating. An example of this is seen in an article from The New York
Times describing how BP tried to blame other companies for the crisis with several
statements. The first statement is from Tony Hayward, former CEO of BP "this is not our
accident, because the rig was owned by Transocean Ltd" (The New York Times 2010). In this
statement, Hayward tries to blame Transocean Ltd. for the crisis and is thereby scapegoating
the crisis. Another example of the same strategy is with the statement "the real issue is the
failure of the safety equipment," referring to the blowout preventer, which was not handled by
BP" (The New York Times 2010) and "It is clear the accident was the result of multiple
equipment errors and human error involving many companies" (CNN: Europe 2010). In these
statements, it is clear that BP tries to reduce the company's responsibility for the crisis by
blaming other companies for it. The last statement even indicates that the crisis happened due
to both multiple companies, work teams and circumstances over time and indirectly that the
crisis could have happened for any oil company meaning that BP was just unlucky that it
happened this time. By this, it becomes obvious that BP does not deny that there was an
accident, as it was clear that an accident had happened, but instead BP states that the company
cannot be put to blame for what happened.
The next step in BP's crisis communication was to use the diminishment posture, and here the
company used both excusing and justification when it communicated to the public and in
public. An example of excusing is seen in the same example as in scapegoating "It is clear the
accident was the result of multiple equipment errors and human error involving many
companies" (CNN: Europe 2010). This statement can also indicate that the company had no
control of the event that led to the crisis, as it was caused by several instances such as more
companies than just BP. By using this strategy, the company have might been in the thought
that the stakeholders and the public would put some of the blame on other companies, so that
BP would not be put to blame for the entire crisis. With the same statement as earlier, Tony
Hayward tries to minimize the actual crisis by stating that the accident happened due to many
different errors and not only errors from BP's side. However, it was not only the excusing
strategy BP came up with during the crisis, as there are also examples of justification from
BP. As mentioned in the theory section (see section 4.1.3), justification is when a company
tries to minimize the damages associated with the crisis, for instance by stating that there were
Page 20 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
no serious damages. In the article "BP's PR Blunders Mirror Exxon's, Appear Destined for
Record Book" there is a statement from Tony Hayward that goes well with the justification
strategy, as he states that "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." and that
"the environmental impact of this disaster is likely to have been very, very modest" (The New
York Times 2010). It might have been a nice try for the CEO Tony Hayward to minimize the
crisis, however, when indirectly stating that the environmental impact of crisis is no big deal
because of the ocean size, it may do more harm to the image than saving it.
The last crisis response strategy BP used during the oil spill in 2010 is the rebuilding posture.
The rebuilding posture includes compensation and apology as mentioned earlier, and I will
analyse the strategies and argue for BP's use of both strategies in the spill.
BP announced quite early in the crisis that the company would compensate people and other
companies which have been influenced by the crisis in one way or another; "BP has said that
it will compensate anyone whose business has been impacted by the spill" (CNN 2010).
Nonetheless, it is imaginable to believe that BP made these compensations to avoid some kind
of trial from those who were affected by the oil spill. A statement from "BP's PR Blunders
Mirror Exxon's, Appear Destined for Record Book" indicates that some of the compensation
only were handed out to avoid a trial, as it states that BP would pay fishermen $5,000 each if
they agreed not to sue BP; "BP also hit controversy as it offered to pay fishermen $5,000
while asking them to sign waivers agreeing not to sue BP" (The New York Times 2010). It is
understandable if BP paid the fishermen for agreeing not to sue, as it would have a negative
outcome for the image of the company with lawsuits. Furthermore, it would be quite
expensive for the company to be pulled in court by every fisherman in the area of the Gulf of
Mexico and thereby, it was easier to arrange an agreement with them instead of lawsuits. On
August 5 2010, BP had made payments for $303 million to more than 40,000 individuals and
companies impacted by the oil spill, and the company stated that it would continue the paying
until the Gulf Coast Claims Facility (GCCF) took over the claim processing for businesses
and individuals in the end of August 2010 (BP 2010). Additionally, another statement from
"BP Chief to Express Contrition in Remarks to Panel" indicates that BP were forced to pay
this large compensation due to President Barack Obama; "The resolution of both the $20
billion fund, to be held in escrow, and the looming controversy over as much as $10.5 billion
in dividends BP had been prepared to pay out provided the first triumphal moment for Mr.
Page 21 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
Obama since the disaster. Weeks of bad news about failed attempts to plug the well and everincreasing estimates of how much oil was leaking were creating a political crisis for a
president who had promised to restore competence to government" (The New York Times
2010). From this statement, it is shown that Barack Obama was pleased with the fund from
BP. As written in the background knowledge about the oil spill in 2010, Barack Obama stated
in a speech to the American people that he would make BP pay all damages the crisis would
cause (see section 6.1.2), and thereby it might not have been BP's own choice to pay out these
amounts, nevertheless, the company had to in order to maintain the image. However, it is
rarely that those who are to pay compensation due to some kind of crisis do it voluntary, and
it was likely not BP's own choice to pay out so much money. The reason why it could have
damaged the image of the company is due to the promise of the American President that the
company will pay, and if the company does not pay, BP will seem unreliable to the
stakeholders and the image could be damaged this way. It would probably also have damaged
the image of Barack Obama that he promises something that he cannot keep, however, as BP
did pay compensation and the president thereby kept his promise, we can only guess what
could have happened.
The next strategy in the rebuilding posture is apology, and as written earlier this one is a bit
complex; if a company accepts its responsibility of a crisis, it must pay in court as it has
already lost lawsuits related to the crisis then, which is one reasons why this strategy is so
complex. At first sight, is does not seem as if the company uses full apology, as it seems like
BP never accepted the full responsibility for the crisis, because the company blames other
companies to have a part in the crisis, and BP will therefore not take the full responsibility for
it. If the company does not accept the full responsibility, it would use the partial apology,
which is only an expression of concern and regret. Although, after looking deeper at the
articles, it can be indicated that BP has used the full apology and thereby has taken the full
responsibility for the crisis. My indications are made from this statement from the article "BP
apology campaign begins airing" where it is stated that "BP has taken full responsibility for
cleaning up the spill in the Gulf," he says. "We've helped organize the largest environmental
response in this country's history. More than 2 million feet of boom, 30 planes and over 1,300
boats are working to protect the shoreline. Where oil reaches the shore, thousands of people
are ready to clean it up. We will honor all legitimate claims. And our cleanup efforts will not
come at any cost to taxpayers" (CNN: U.S. 2010). From this statement, it is seen that BP
Page 22 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
takes the full responsibility for the cleaning after the crisis and will take all legitimate claims
that must come in consideration. Another statement from the same article is about the regret
from BP "To those affected and your families, I am deeply sorry. The Gulf is home for
thousands of BP's employees and we all feel the impact. To all the volunteers and for the
strong support of the government, thank you. We know it is our responsibility to keep you
informed. And do everything we can so this never happens again. We will get this done. We
will make this right." (CNN: U.S. 2010). In this statement, BP apologises for the crisis and
promises that the company will do everything it can make sure that a crisis like this will never
happen again, which is exactly what the full apology strategy is about; acknowledge the crisis,
accept responsibility, include a promise not to repeat the crisis and express concern and regret
(Coombs 2012, 156). However, to use more than one statement concerning BP's
responsibility, the advertisement from BP "We will get it done. We will make this right" will
be included with the statement; "BP will continue to take full responsibility for cleaning up
the spill" (see appendix 9.1). As those before, this statement tells that BP will keep on taking
full responsibility for the cleaning and the crisis and was printed in The New York Times to
inform the American people hereabout.
6.3 BP's Image restoration strategies
This section will be about the image restoration, which is used to restore an image after a
crisis. When facing a crisis like the one BP did, it is hard to avoid the image being damaged
even though the company employs crisis communication throughout the crisis. The image
restoration strategies look a bit like the crisis response strategies, however, the image
restoration theories are developed specific to restore a threatened or damaged image, and the
crisis response strategies are to avoid the damages. When the damages of an image have been
caused, the image restoration strategies can be used either to fix the image or to ensure that
the image at least will not be damaged more than it has been. As mentioned before, it is
possible to use more than one strategy, as a crisis go through different stages depending on
how long it has been going on.
As in the crisis response strategies, the first image restoration strategy BP used during the
crisis is denial, shifting the blame. As we have seen in different statements from articles, BP
tried to shift the blame onto other companies, meaning that BP would not get the entire blame
for the crisis, which was shown in this statement "It is clear the accident was the result of
Page 23 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
multiple equipment errors and human error involving many companies" (CNN: Europe
2010). When blaming other companies, BP might have hoped that some of the blame were
moved away from the company and onto another, and thereby, it would not threaten the image
as much as if BP was blamed for the entire crisis. However, as the crisis communication
analysis indicated, this strategy was no success as it was BP that was blamed for everything,
despite of several attempts of blaming multiple companies. Hence, BP chose to take the full
responsibility for the oil spill.
The next strategy BP employed to restore the image is reducing offensiveness of event in
which compensation were highly used. For instance, BP paid fishermen if they agreed not to
sue the company, and the company created a $20 billion fund which was to pay for damage
claims to thousands of people along the Gulf Coast "BP would create a $20 billion fund to
pay damage claims to thousands of fishermen and others along the Gulf Coast. BP also said it
would suspend dividend payments to shareholders" (The New York Times 2010). According
to a statement from "Where BP's money is landing", the company had on July 3 received more
than 90,000 claims with an amount of more than $144 million; " Since May, it has paid just
under a third of the more than 90,000 claims it has received, with the checks totalling more
than $144 million" (The New York Times: Business Day. 2010). The amounts that already
had been paid had gone to different kinds of people, and it is estimated that about 80 percent
of the payments have been paid to self-employed workers such as shrimpers, beachfront
condo owners and charter boat captains. The payments, which had already been made on July
3, were to those who clearly could show that the oil spill had affected their ability to make a
profit. However, it is only few large companies that have been compensated this time, as their
claims are more complex and therefore, have a longer process time (The New York Times:
Business Day. 2010).
By using compensation, it might curb the anger of those who were most affected, such as
those losing their profit. If the company had not paid compensation to those people, it is
imaginable that there would have been outcries and demonstrations among these people.
The third image restoration BP used was corrective action with the purpose of trying to
correct the error by solving the problem or make sure that it would not happen again. BP
utilized corrective action several times during the crisis when the company tried to stop the
leak; however, it did not succeed until August 2010, which was four months after the
explosion. The corrective action, which is interesting in this case, is the one that actually was
Page 24 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
a success for the company and stopped the oil spill. The corrective action is called "static kill"
and was to be executed by sending mud down to the well to stop the leak. When it was
ensured that the mud was working and the leak was stopped, the well would be sealed with
cement and in this way permanently sealed, and the oil would no longer flow into the water
(CNN: U.S. 2010).
However, the action with cement was not performed without authorization from the National
Incident Commander (NIC). Furthermore, all operations that had been carried out have used
guidance and approval from NIC and other government officials (BP 2010). By stopping the
leak, it may have brought joy to many people, as no more oil was to run into the water and BP
had finally found a solution to the problem, the company was being blamed for.
After the leak was stopped, the company might have hoped that the image would no longer be
threatened, but to be absolutely sure that the image was "safe", the company used the last
restoration strategy mortification. As mentioned before, mortification is when a company
accepts its responsibility and apologises for the crisis. As the crisis communication analysis
showed, there were several statements in which BP accepted the responsibility and
apologised, for instance as in the statement in the advertisement (see appendix 9.1) "BP will
continue to take full responsibility for cleaning up the spill". When a company accepts the
responsibility in a crisis, it may have a positive effect on people, as they are able to see how
this company does not try to escape the doings, but abide by the responsibility it has when a
crisis occurs, and this also might be positive for the image of the company.
6.4 Evaluation of the crisis communication
In this section, the crisis communication and the communication in general from BP, will be
evaluated. This evaluation will be used to conclude whether the communication was a success
or not, and what could have been done in a different way. This section will include the
cultural theory from Hall, when evaluating on the general communication. The evaluation will
be based on articles from August to December 2010 to give a view of how the media wrote
about
BP
at
this
time.
The final answers to this section will be based on whether the media wrote negative or
positive about the company at this time or the media were neutral towards the company. If the
media at this time were positive or neutral towards the company, the crisis communication
Page 25 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
from BP was a success. However, if the media wrote negatively about BP at this time, the
crisis communication was not a success, as the media therefore would affect people
negatively.
6.4.1 Evaluation of the strategies
Through the entire crisis, the media have frequently been writing about BP and the crisis to
inform people in both a positive and a negative way. After the crisis was stopped, how did the
media then write about the company and the crisis communication? An article from CNN is
criticizing BP for its crisis communication as the article states "The public's perception of how
the BP oil disaster was handled in the Gulf of Mexico eventually affected the response itself...
The appearance that BP was playing an inordinate role in the response "created a lot of
concern" (CNN: U.S. 2010). This statement indicates that instead of making a proper and well
informed crisis communication, BP made the crisis communication from what the company
believed the people wanted, which created concern among the population instead of serenity.
Furthermore, Thad Allen the National Incident Commander stated "As the owner of the
ruptured well, BP is responsible for the cost of the response and cleanup and could be on the
hook for massive penalties as a result of the disaster. Allen said the company's financial
responsibilities adversely affected the public's opinion of the oil giant. and the requirements
facing BP seemed to "bring into question whether or not every decision could, should or
would have been made based on what was best for the environment and the response itself."
(CNN: U.S. 2010). According to this statement, people's opinion were affected negatively by
the financial responsibility BP faced during the crisis with the many compensations, which
also was to affect BP with a negative attitude towards the company. Moreover, Allen
expressed that the company did not do what was best for the environment in the response
strategies when making decisions about the crisis, which is likely to believe also would have
affected several people in a negative opinion towards BP.
Another article criticized the report BP made after the crisis, as it is said that the report
includes too many errors and does not inform about what happened to the remaining oil that
BP did not attain to remove from the water. "It does not tell us where the oil is today or its
final fate,” she said. “This report does not address impact at all.” (The New York Times:
Environment 2010). This statement is from an article printed on The New York Times
website in November 2010, and a statement like this can affect those who are reading the
Page 26 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
report in a negative way, as it has been stated in one of the biggest newspapers in the U.S that
the report from BP contains several errors.
After reading several articles from after the crisis, it seems like none of them are writing
positively about BP. However, one statement from CNN made me stop and think deeper
about the statement as it could give expression for some kind of positive thinking. In the end,
it was not as positive as it seemed like in the beginning as it states; "Its owner, oil giant BP,
began its final cementing operations to cap the well on Friday...The death of the well is a
milestone that likely will draw only momentary celebration" (CNN: U.S. 2010). From this
statement, it seems like the effort that BP did to stop the crisis, only will be remembered
shortly even though it is a milestone that the spill has been stopped.
The most negative article about BP is printed in the Guardian in December. This article is
based on a report from the White House oil commission that argues that the whole crisis could
have been avoided if the management had been better, which is indicated in this statement
"Bad management and a communications breakdown by BP and its Macondo well partners
caused the oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, the White House oil spill commission said
today" (The Guardian 2010). The only positive thing in this article for BP is that the
commission argues that the crisis not is caused alone by BP, but also by Halliburton Co, and
Transocean Ltd (The Guardian 2010).
When a report is composed by the White House oil spill commission and printed in a public
newspaper, it can cause serious damages to the involved companies including BP, as most
people find the White House a reliable source and therefore believe that the crisis could have
been avoided, if there had been better management.
According to these articles, the crisis communication from BP did not have the hoped success,
as the media kept on writing negatively about the company, which could damage the image
even though the crisis was stopped. One of the things the company especially is criticized for
is the slow public communication and that the company should have been faster to start the
crisis communication. Additionally, it does not send a good signal outwardly that BP first
promises to compensate the victims after Barack Obama has been on live TV promising that
he will make the company pay everything. This step should have been taken before President
Obama went on TV, so it would be an initiative from BP itself.
Page 27 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
6.4.2 Evaluation of the communication (Hall)
As mentioned in the introduction to section 6.4, this section will comment on the language BP
used in the communication strategy, to see whether it corresponds to Hall's theory or not.
According to Hall, the population in the U.S belong to the group of low context people,
meaning that the Americans want solutions to problems within short time, and they get
anxious when the decisions are not made at once. Besides, Hall points out that the American
people feel uncomfortable with indirectness and therefore prefer directness in the
communication. Additionally, the focus is on the information, and all decisions are taken on
basis of the information.
Based on the theory by Hall, BP had adjusted the communication towards the American
people. On April 21 2010, BP had already announced the first strategy for what the company
aimed to do to minimize the crisis at that point (BP 2010). Furthermore, this press release was
written in a direct language with a large amount of information about the handling plan; "BP
has also initiated a plan for the drilling of a relief well, if required. A nearby drilling rig will
be used to drill the well. The rig is available to begin activity immediately" (BP 2010).
Additionally, throughout the advertisement (see appendix 9.1) BP informed people reading
The New York Times that the company would take full responsibility for the cleaning, which
is a very direct way of using communication.
Through all the statements BP made during the crisis, the language is written in a clear and
understandable way, with the needed information. Out of the analyses, I believe that the
communication is adjusted to the low context culture and thereby, also the American people,
meaning that BP succeeded in the overall communication, but the specific crisis strategies
employed by the company should have been changed as mentioned earlier.
Page 28 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
7. Conclusion
After finishing my analyses, it is now possible to answer the problem statement, which is as
following; "Which strategies did BP use during the oil spill in 2010 to maintain BP’s image
towards the stakeholders and how did BP use these strategies".
Through my analyses, I have discovered that BP used two different strategies during the oil
spill in 2010; the theory of crisis communication and the image restoration theory. BP made
use of the strategies to create communication towards the stakeholders and the American
population through the crisis. The crisis communication strategy included more strategies and
BP chose to use five of the possible ten strategies. The strategies BP used in the crisis
communication were scapegoating, excusing, justification, compensation and apology. These
strategies were used together with different initiatives from BP, which were to constitute the
crisis communication.
Scapegoating was used to blame other companies for the crisis as BP adhered to the fact that
the company was not responsible for the crisis alone. Excusing was used by BP when
explaining how the company was not in control of the crisis that stroke, and additionally, the
company used justification in an attempt to minimize the damages from the crisis with
statements from Tony Hayward saying that "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." and that "the environmental impact of this disaster is likely to have been very,
very modest". As the next step in the crisis communication, BP started to compensate the
victims of the crisis, both businesses and people for instance fishermen who lost their ability
of making profit due to the oil spill. Compensation was also used to avoid trials from
fishermen, as BP paid them $5.000 each, if they agreed not to sue the company. After trying
different strategies, BP took the full responsibility for the crisis and the cleaning in the end,
and thereby used the apology strategy. The company went public, expressed regret and
concern, and promised that BP would do what it could in order to prevent a crisis like this to
happen again.
Along with the crisis communication, BP had to use image restoration theory, as the company
image was threatened by this crisis and thereby had to do something to avoid the image of
being damaged. The image restoration theory has some similarities to the crisis
communication, however, this strategy is put to use when an image is threatened so this
Page 29 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
strategy can give some guidelines on how to restore the image. Four different strategies were
used from the image restoration theory to restore the company image and those strategies
were; shifting the blame, compensation, corrective action and mortification. Shifting the
blame and compensation were also employed in the crisis communication as BP kept
adhering that the crisis was not caused by BP alone, and compensation by compensating those
who were affected by the crisis for instance by loosing the ability of making a profit. With the
'static kill' operation BP finally managed to stop the leak by pouring mud into the well and
later on cement when it was certain that the leak was stopped, which illustrated the corrective
action strategy. By using mortification, BP went public and apologised for the crisis and
expressed regret and concern to the victims of the crisis.
In the evaluation of the crisis communication, it was discovered that the crisis communication
did not have the wished effect, as the media kept writing negatively about BP months after the
crisis was stopped. The static kill operation was even referred to as something that would only
draw momentary celebration. However, the communication language was more successful
than the crisis communication, as the communication was adjusted the American people to fit
the low context culture. The company posted a handling plan already the day after the crisis
stroke, which is one of the criteria about the American people; they want quick response and
quick solutions.
Page 30 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
8. Bibliography
Benoit, William L. 1995. Accounts, Excuses and Apologies: A Theory of Image Restoration
Strategies. State University of New York Press, Albany
BBC. 2010. "Obama vows to 'make BP pay' for oil spill damage." Accessed May 19.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10325271
BBC: World. 2010. "Q&A: BP Gulf oil spill compensation fund." Accessed May 19.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10369918
Bloomberg. 2010. "Deepwater Drilling Ban Lifted By New Orleans Federal Judge." Accessed
May 19. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-06-22/u-s-deepwater-oil-drilling-ban-liftedtoday-by-new-orleans-federal-judge.html
BP. 2010. "BP Authorized to Begin Cementing Procedure on MC252 Well." Accessed May
20. http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/press/press-releases/bp-authorized-to-begincementing-procedure-on-mc252-well.html
BP. 2010. "BP Claim Payments Exceed $300 Million." Accessed May 20.
http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/press/press-releases/bp-claim-payments-exceed-300million.html
BP. 2010. "BP confirms that Transocean Ltd issued the following statement today. Accessed
May 20. http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/press/press-releases/bp-confirms-thattransocean-ltd-issued-the-following-statement-today.html
BP. 2010. "BP Initiates Response to Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill." Accessed May 20.
http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/press/press-releases/bp-initiates-response-to-gulf-ofmexico-oil-spill.html
BP. 2014. "Deepwater Horizon accident and response." Accessed May 19.
http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/gulf-of-mexico-restoration/deepwater-horizonaccident-and-response.html
BP. 2014. "First oil." Accessed May 19. http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/aboutbp/our-history/history-of-bp/first-oil.html
BP. 2014. "New millennium." Accessed May 19.
http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/about-bp/our-history/history-of-bp/newmillennium.html
BP.2010. "Our history." Accessed May 20. http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/aboutbp/our-history.html
Page 31 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
BP. 2014. "Post war." Accessed May 19. http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/aboutbp/our-history/history-of-bp/post-war.html
BP. 2010. "Press releases." Accessed May 20.
http://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/press/pressreleases.html?speechesThemes=false&keywords=&themes=&start=20%2F04%2F2010&end
=23%2F08%2F2010&go=go
CNN: Europe. 2010. "Outfoing BP executive blames 'many companies' for Gulf crisis."
Accessed May 15.
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/europe/07/27/bp.hayward.blame/index.html?iref=allsea
rch
CNN. 2010. "Oil response team demands BP transparency." Accessed May 15.
http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/06/09/oil-response-team-demands-bptransparency/?iref=storysearch
CNN: U.S.. 2010. "BP apology campaign begins airing." Accessed May 15.
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/06/02/oil.spill.bp.apology/index.html?iref=storysearch
CNN: U.S.. 2010. "BP starts pouring cement into its undersea well." Accessed May 16.
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/08/05/gulf.bp.cementing/index.html?iref=allsearch
CNN: U.S.. 2010. "BP to pour cement down crippled well in next step to seal it." Accessed
May 16. http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/08/04/gulf.oil.spill/index.html
CNN: U.S.. 2010. "BP oil well 'effectively dead' 5 months after spill began." Accessed May
20. http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/09/18/gulf.oil.disaster/
CNN: U.S.. 2010. "Public perception of BP affected spill response, Allen says." Accessed
May 17. http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/09/27/gulf.oil.disaster/index.html?iref=allsearch
CNN: World. 2014. "Oil Spills Fast Facts." Accessed May 19.
http://edition.cnn.com/2013/07/13/world/oil-spills-fast-facts/
Collin, Finn and Simo Køppe. 2012. Humanistisk Videnskabsteori. DR Multimedie
Coombs, W. Timothy. 2012. Ongoing Crisis Communication: Planning, Managing and
Responding. SAGE Publications
Fuglsang, L., Olsen, P. B., and Rasborg, K. Videnskabsteori i Samfundsvidenskaberne. 2013.
Samfundslitteratur
Hall, Edward T. and Mildred Reed Hall. 1990. Understanding cultural differences: Germans,
French and Americans. Intercultural Press, Inc.
Johansen, Winni and Finn Frandsen. 2008. Krisekommunikation. Forlaget Samfundslitteratur
Page 32 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
Rasmussen, E. S., Østergaard, P., and Andersen, H. 2010. Samfundsvidenskabelige metoder en introduktion. Odense M: Syddansk Universitetsforlag.
The Guardian. 2010. "BP oil spill blamed on management and communication failures."
Accessed May 20. http://www.theguardian.com/business/2010/dec/02/bp-oil-spill-failures
The New York Times. 2010. "BP Chief to Express Contrition in Remarks to Panel." Accessed
May 15.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/17/us/politics/17obama.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
The New York Times. 2010. "BP's PR Blunders Mirror Exxon's, Appear Destined for Record
Book." Accessed May 15. http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2010/06/10/10greenwire-bps-prblunders-mirror-exxons-appear-destined-98819.html?pagewanted=all
The New York Times: Business Day. 2010. "Where BP’s Money Is Landing." Accessed May
15.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/04/business/04metricstext.html?mabReward=relbias:w&act
ion=click&adxnnl=1&region=searchResults&module=Search&url=http://query.nytimes.com/
search/sitesearch/?action=click&region=Masthead&pgtype=Homepage&module=SearchSub
mit&contentCollection=Homepage&t=qry845#/oil+spill+BP/from20100420to20100830/&ad
xnnlx=1399903284-1gB6sllhyD1Clx9xjl0qyw
The New York Times: Environment. 2010. "Scientists Back Early Government Report on
Gulf Spill." Accessed May 17.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/24/science/earth/24spill.html
The New York Times: U.S.. 2010. "BP Begins Test That Could Halt Oil Spill." Accessed
May 15.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/15/us/15spill.html?action=click&module=Search&region=s
earchResults&mabReward=relbias%3Aw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fquery.nytimes.com%2Fsear
ch%2Fsitesearch%2F%3Faction%3Dclick%26region%3DMasthead%26pgtype%3DHomepa
ge%26module%3DSearchSubmit%26contentCollection%3DHomepage%26t%3Dqry845%23
%2Foil%2Bspill%2BBP%2Ffrom20100420to20100830%2F
The New York Times: U.S.. 2010. "BP Is Criticized Over Oil Spill, but U.S Missed Chances
to Act. Accessed May 15.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/01/us/01gulf.html?pagewanted=all&action=click&module=
Search&region=searchResults&mabReward=relbias%3Aw&url=http%3A%2F%2Fquery.nyti
mes.com%2Fsearch%2Fsitesearch%2F%3Faction%3Dclick%26region%3DMasthead%26pgt
ype%3DHomepage%26module%3DSearchSubmit%26contentCollection%3DHomepage%26t
%3Dqry845%23%2Foil%2Bspill%2BBP%2Ffrom20100420to20100830%2F&_r=0
Page 33 of 34
Henriette Nyrup Vigsø
Bachelor project
Aalborg University
May 2014
9. Appendices
9.1 Appendix 1 - Advertisement from BP "We will get it done. We will make
this right"
Page 34 of 34