The paper presents an ethical dilemma presented in a case study " Did BP Atone for its Transgressions? Expanding Theory on ' Ethical Apology ' in Crisis Communication " by Diers‐Lawson & Pang (2016). The case study questions the BP 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico's ethical response to the disaster.
The ethical question in this study was how BP oil management responded to the historical oil spill. The company denied responsibility and blamed the incident on the contractor, yet it later emerged that it is the company's poor management and inappropriate culture that led to the disaster. On 20 th April 2020, an explosion occurred at the BP Deepwater H oil rigging facility, releasing 135 million gallons and more of unprocessed oil into the Gulf of Mexico. This oil spill was the biggest ever recorded in the American water-oil spill history, and even after a decade remains the worst environmental disasters in the global books. Millions of marine animals, birds, fish, and turtles lost lives, and 11 rig workers were killed in the incident. For 87 days, oil poured into a highly diverse marine habitat with any intervention.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
A federal board conducting investigations into the incident concluded that an underwater well last-ditch safety device had several failures, was not tested properly, and still has some risks for most of the rigs drilling going on. The report by the United States chemical safety board specifically singled out the problem with the blowout preventer and accused illegal operations and management. They discovered faulty wiring in two instances, a hulking device with a bent pipe and a dead battery. This was the explanation for the oil spills into the Gulf, which led to the worst disasters in company mismanagement.
Diers‐Lawson & Pang (2016) argues that it is essential that a company acknowledges the harm, apologizes to the public, and act in a manner that shows its intent to resolve the problem. The author further says that the organization must also openly show that it cares about the affected community. This, the authors say, can be achieved through responsibility communication for the affected parties, communicating that the actions they are taking are voluntary. It has to engage in a dialogue showing an interest in understanding, a lending ear to hear, and being responsive to the experiences, voices and experienced situations by the people directly.
BP's actions immediately, the incident started, during the event, and after it happened, showed otherwise. It is a perfect way not to handle o respond to a crisis. The BP executives took an immediate position, distancing themselves from the problem. They directly blamed the contractors making the company image stubborn and arrogant. The company CEO pictures showed him yachting 48 hours after the incident began. Diers‐Lawson & Pang (2016) describes this as a failure in communicating corporate social responsibility. The authors, however, conclude that the content and the manner of the company's apology showed an ethical excuse. However, they were not believed by most people in their ten days of the crisis since they focused on apology most of the time and focused on empathy later.
The consequences of BP's unethical response and unethical handling of the oil spillage ended up in court. The company also lost its reputation by the community. The company management was replaced with new faces, and today the company struggles to gain back its image and might. While these ethical issues could not be the basis for convicting the managers, they contributed towards mistrust amongst the public and almost immediate accusation of the company management for engagement in poor management practices.
References
Diers‐Lawson, A., & Pang, A. (2016). Did BP atone for its transgressions? Expanding theory
on 'ethical apology 'in crisis communication. Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management , 24 (3), 148-161.
