One of the biggest pitfalls of working in the PR biz, for me, is that I simply assume that most of what’s on the news is seriously distorted, if not fabricated outright. For that reason, I was really impressed with the guy from BP who went before Congress to talk about the oil spill. I’m amazed that the word ‘testify’ is still used: as far as I can tell there’s no testifying whatsoever. Whomever has drawn the unlucky number for the public flogging – bankers, auto people and, last week, the oil industry – shows up and is yelled at and cut off mid-sentence and generally ridiculed. It’s all on camera, of course, and it’s a great opportunity for our elected officials to show us how tough and down with the people they are.
And an even greater opportunity for those elected officials to get some great material – or ‘collateral,’ as the marketing people like to say – for their upcoming elections. I find it as entertaining as anyone, but my problem with it goes like this: if the shouting officials are members of a committee that’s supposed to oversee energy issues, to use last week’s example, did they not pay any attention to what BP and others were doing in the gulf until the rig blew up? Last week the members of Congress took the stage and yelled about BP’s abysmal safety record. And that’s news? Nobody knew? Are these people who sit on the energy committee paying any attention to what mega companies like BP are doing? Or does the committee take its cues from the group that was making sure the nation’s finances were in good working order? If BP was violating regulations meant, allegedly, to ensure the viability of the gulf, who let that slide? Do these people we elect do or say anything sensible when the cameras aren’t running? I accept that we’re suffering from an acute case of memory void, but I’d like to know what these elected people were crowing about when BP set up shop in the gulf and hired some locals. My guess is that it wasn’t rules and regulations.
Anyhow, the guy from BP was having none of it, and for that I’d give him a solid A if I were handing out grades. He refused to speculate on the investigation. He refused to answer questions that fell outside of his area of responsibility and his tenure with the company. He out-snided the character actors firing off “questions.” Good for him. The night of his appearance, I was listening to the BBC news and on came a guy who runs some sort of bullshit strategy consulting firm in the U.S. He said he’s coached hundreds of CEOs and that the guy from BP really did not do well. He needed to show more passion, said the consultant. He needed to really let the people in the gulf knows that he cares about them, that he identifies with them. That’s wrong on all counts, I think. The people in the gulf are suffering because they’re at the bottom of the money ladder. The guy from BP, on the other hand, well, he’s a millionaire. He’s supposed to pretend to identify with people who run shrimp boats and lobster stands? He runs a big company that apparently was allowed to cut corners for the sake of profit. And he should show some passion? I would imagine he saves his passion for yacht racing, which he did over the weekend with his son. Unlike the elected officials, he showed his true colors on camera, for all the world to see, and it was quite a middle finger raised at people I believe deserve it.
