Slashdot Mirror


BP Buys "Oil Spill" Search Term

technology_dude found an unsurprising but amusing little story that BP is buying keywords on Google and Yahoo for things like "Oil Spill" to help spin some damage control. I guess if you can't plug your spill, the least you can do is try to clog the flow of information.

64 of 439 comments (clear)

  1. have they bought "Beyond Pitiful" yet? by swschrad · · Score: 3, Insightful

    how about they concentrate their efforts a mile down instead?

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
    1. Re:have they bought "Beyond Pitiful" yet? by lennier1 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Before you know it they'll buy other applicable terms like "criminal negligence" as well.

    2. Re:have they bought "Beyond Pitiful" yet? by Leebert · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Good question. I mean, I hear that the janitors are still cleaning the toilets in BP headquarters! Where are their priorities?!

      Seriously, they're a big company, they can focus on more than one thing at a time... It's like the Mythical Man-Month -- Just throwing resources at the problem isn't necessarily going to make it better, and could well make it worse.

    3. Re:have they bought "Beyond Pitiful" yet? by Yvan256 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Don't give them ideas.

    4. Re:have they bought "Beyond Pitiful" yet? by Yvan256 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's not that they're doing more than one thing at a time, it's that they're trying to get the top results for "oil spill" so that real news are pushed down the list of results.

    5. Re:have they bought "Beyond Pitiful" yet? by PhilHibbs · · Score: 2, Interesting

      How exactly can the PR and marketing department assist a mile underwater? Answer, they can't. BP has to survive as a company in order to be able to fix the problem and make amends. They could go bust, but how would that help anyone?

    6. Re:have they bought "Beyond Pitiful" yet? by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      How exactly can the PR and marketing department assist a mile underwater?

      use their bodies to plug up the well?

      Honestly it's the best use for marketing and PR people....

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    7. Re:have they bought "Beyond Pitiful" yet? by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's not like anybody is going to confuse a site on bp.com with real news.

      Probably the reason is that reporting of the oil spill cleanup efforts are riddled with inaccuracies and falsehoods. I was reading several news organizations reports on the "top hat" approach a month or so ago and the amount of variability was insane, given that all they had to do was accurately re-print what BP Engineering had published. Some papers actually claimed it was "ice" clogging up the device for goodness sake.

      People like to make out that corporate PR is some kind of money-based mind control mechanism. And a small amount actually is that (typically the dedicated PR firms). But having seen in-house corporate PR men do their work first hand, it became apparent that 99% of the effort is just trying to ensure journalists don't screw up basic facts.

      Now if BP are publishing things on their landing pages that are verifiably false then my argument doesn't stand, but I doubt that. Even the how-much-oil-spills debacle seems likely to be genuine disagreement rather than a real attempt to mislead.

    8. Re:have they bought "Beyond Pitiful" yet? by six11 · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's like the Mythical Man-Month -- Just throwing resources at the problem isn't necessarily going to make it better, and could well make it worse.

      I'm not sure about that. While Brooks was talking about software and computer hardware engineers, I'm sure you weren't literally talking about plugging the hole with BP engineers. It would be more logical to use BP executives, since they know more about oil flow than computer nerds. Just a hypothesis to test: We would have to actually try stuffing the pipe with BP executives to see if that would stop the flow. And unlike Brooks's theory, I suspect using more BP executives would improve improve the pipe somewhat linearly. Once you run out of C-level and VP-level BP people you could move on to Haliburton.

      I suppose getting past IRB on that little science experiment would be rather difficult, however.

    9. Re:have they bought "Beyond Pitiful" yet? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 2, Funny

      Just a hypothesis to test: We would have to actually try stuffing the pipe with BP executives to see if that would stop the flow.

      They already tried that - remember the 'junk shot'? They even let the execs bring their golf stuff along.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    10. Re:have they bought "Beyond Pitiful" yet? by Leebert · · Score: 2, Insightful

      rarely does the throwing of real resources at a problem "well make it worse".

      Forgive me, but that is kind of a naïve position to take. We're talking about marketing people, here. They are otherwise useless. ;)

      But seriously, you want BP to send marketing people down to the Gulf to help shut off an oil well? Or even to help clean up the spill? (which is likely more resource and equipment constrained, than people constrained) When it comes to certain tasks, you CAN'T just throw unequipped, inexperienced/untrained resources at it. I admit to not knowing for certain that this is the case here.

      Perhaps you are from the BP PR department feeling a bit defensive

      Look, BP deserves to be crucified for this. More than they will be, and we all know that. But that doesn't mean I'm going to shut off my capability to use logic and reason.

    11. Re:have they bought "Beyond Pitiful" yet? by dominious · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Listen. Yesterday i did type "oil spill" in google search and got into the bp website, where i found that they have a suggestions page and a volunteer page and I could actually participate for solving this problem. I think it is much more helpful for everyone if bp handles these search terms.

      Or do you prefer to get a massive amount of hate webpages from bloggers that would actually do no difference to the actual problem?

    12. Re:have they bought "Beyond Pitiful" yet? by rhsanborn · · Score: 3, Informative

      The problem is, apparently, that the well is incredibly unstable. They had a list of other ideas in the event that their "top kill" method didn't work. They didn't even try them because they were seeing pressure numbers and other signs that the well was unstable. They are, reportedly, afraid that if they try to stop the flow completely at the blowout preventer that the pressure will destroy the blowout preventer and the well creating a huge, uncontrolled leak that is coming out of many more places and at a higher volume than is currently coming out of that riser pipe.

    13. Re:have they bought "Beyond Pitiful" yet? by Fnkmaster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If by "real news" you mean "more media hype" then yes. We get it - the oil spill is an environmental disaster. It's bad for BP, it's really bad for fisherman in the Gulf, and it's generally bad for the economy in all the Gulf states, and it's definitely bad for the marine ecosystem.

      BP has already suffered a near crippling blow. They have lost *100 billion* dollars in market cap. The CEO is going to be toast along with quite a few other people as soon as they have the situation calmed down - the board just doesn't want to toast him until things quiet down a bit. The other companies involved, Transocean, Andarko, etc. have suffered proportionally similar blows, accounting for 10s of billions of dollars in additional market cap wiped out.

      And the sad thing is that the "punish BP" bloodlust is just going to result in thousands of decent Americans who work in the energy industry losing jobs in the inevitable restructurings that will come, and those jobs will end up going elsewhere, since we still will be consuming the oil here.

      The only worse penalty BP as a corporate organization could pay at this point is a firesale takeover (because their successor will have to eat the huge contingent liability here). If somebody or somebodies at BP were negligent or actively broke safety regulations, then by all means, they should be criminally prosecuted for their actions. Top execs will already pay the price when they get the boot from their cushy jobs for the poor oversight they have exercised. If they did something criminal, they should be prosecuted too.

      But this ... obsession ... with personalizing "BP" as some sort of entity that has committed an evil act that we can "punish" in any way further than has already been done is baffling to me. People - it's *been* punished. There are a bunch of marketing and PR weenies on staff at BP and they are just trying to do their jobs here. There's nothing wrong with them promoting the site they put up as a source of information for the public about the oil spill.

      What's more, at this point, more economic damage is actually being done by media hype than by oil itself. The damage to the Florida tourism industry isn't being caused by a few tar balls that washed up, it's being caused by panicked morons canceling their vacations because of what they saw on the news. While I'm all for BP and friends covering the costs of actual damage from their oil spill, I don't think it's reasonable to hold anybody other than the media accountable for the damage from their hype machine, and I can't blame BP's PR people for trying to do what they can to get their side of the story out there (as long as they aren't simply lying about it).

    14. Re:have they bought "Beyond Pitiful" yet? by AGMW · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Yep ... that seems to cover it.

      Oddly, the situations is somewhat more complex than the army of armchair deep sea drilling experts suspect. LMAO @ "... lower a large cork ..."! You'll be suggesting they just put a tray under the sump plug and drain it from there next!

      Anyone who honestly thinks BP isn't doing E V E R Y T H I N G in its power to stem the flow is a fool. Apart from the pollution considerations, the bad PR, and of course not forgetting the clamour from the large cork manufactures now wanting a slice of the action, if they're now pulling 10000 barrels a day from that well and a barrel runs at around 70 bucks ... well, I'd say you do the math(s) but someone might suggest I lower a cork on it so I'll do it for ya - $700000!
      That they are also trying to stem the flow of bad publicity is totally understandable too, because people keep posting asshat ideas like "lower a large cork" and all the numbnuts dolts read that and nod saying, "yer ... why dontcha just lower a large cork BP? Eh? Why dontcha?". And people cheering when buffoons suggest that the whole company should concentrate their efforts a mile down instead - does he expect every PA, secretary, programmer, lorry driver, pump attendant, etc, to all be controlling their own ROV at the site?

      Now I'm not saying BP are squeaky clean in this - my guess is that BP suspect that capping the well is nigh on impossible without the relief wells easing the pressure though obviously they'll keep trying - but to think they don't want to stop the oil flow is frankly as ludicrous a concept as having every BP employee lowering their very own large cork!

      As Fnkmaster (89084) wrote: (on Tuesday June 08, @01:49PM (#32499016)) ... the "punish BP" bloodlust ... is crazy when so many Americans work in the industry as all you're doing is shooting yourselves in the foot! If BP doesn't do the deep drilling someone else will and maybe the next company to do it won't be hiring so many Americans and pumping so much money into the US economy?

      --
      Eclectic beats from Leeds, UK
      handmadehands.co.uk
    15. Re:have they bought "Beyond Pitiful" yet? by AndersOSU · · Score: 2, Informative

      People reading newspapers don't know what methyl hydrates and clathrates are. Ice is a reasonable description for something that is liquid under STP, but solid at the bottom of the ocean.

    16. Re:have they bought "Beyond Pitiful" yet? by Chris+Burke · · Score: 5, Insightful

      BP has already suffered a near crippling blow. They have lost *100 billion* dollars in market cap. ... 10s of billions of dollars in additional market cap wiped out.

      Oh noes, not market cap! That's the thing about market cap -- it can be wiped out instantly, but it can come back too, and the only people who lose anything are the ones who sold while it was down. If BP was planning on buying out a smaller oil company using shares of their stock, well, now would be a bad time to do that. Oh noes!

      In the meantime, BP continues to make real profits to the tune of tens of millions per day.

      I'm not saying it's not a blow, but it's hardly crippling. Companies can continue to operate and make substantial profits even after tremendous stock price drops. And if BP does continue to make money, then their stock price will recover.

      And the sad thing is that the "punish BP" bloodlust is just going to result in thousands of decent Americans who work in the energy industry losing jobs in the inevitable restructurings that will come, and those jobs will end up going elsewhere, since we still will be consuming the oil here.

      It's an odd mentality, where the cause-and-effect here wouldn't be the obvious "Executive negligence in their company losing many jobs", but rather "the public caring that the executives cut corners and ignored signs because it would cost time and thus money resulted in this disaster, and subsequent job loss".

      Yes, obviously the solution is that we should not care!

      No. If people attributed cause and effect correctly, maybe we'd get some real change around here.

      Top execs will already pay the price when they get the boot from their cushy jobs for the poor oversight they have exercised. If they did something criminal, they should be prosecuted too.

      Oh noes they'll be fired from their cushy jobs! They might have to lay low living off their scant millions for a while before getting a cushy VP job somewhere else because the last thing the incestuous network of corporate executives and board members want is to raise standards.

      Nothing short of criminal prosecution will be any kind of real punishment. I'm not holding my breath on the end result, but at least one thing is going right.

      But this ... obsession ... with personalizing "BP" as some sort of entity that has committed an evil act that we can "punish" in any way further than has already been done is baffling to me. People - it's *been* punished.

      Yeah, by only making half as much net profit -- estimates of BP's efforts at cleanup and stopping the leak per day are about half of their net profit per day.

      Oh, the punishment! Their Q2 and Q3 earnings statements will be less glowing! They may be penalized in the market, until the expected profits return! Please. Call me when they go into the red, even for a single quarter.

      By the way, the obsession with personalizing a corporation as some sort of entity unto itself has been the obsession of the corporate executives since early last century. Is it any wonder that we have bought into the delusion that "BP" can do anything on its own? "Corporate personhood" is their baby.

      If you want to end that delusion, I'm all for it. But realize that the executives themselves are on the other side of this one from you, as is for that matter the law.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    17. Re:have they bought "Beyond Pitiful" yet? by Chowderbags · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Top execs will already pay the price when they get the boot from their cushy jobs for the poor oversight they have exercised.

      Yeah, where's the sympathy for those poor executives. How will Tony Hayward survive without his 2.5 million pound compensation package? If he gets fired and can't find another job, he might have to live in only semi-luxury for the rest of his life! The horror!

    18. Re:have they bought "Beyond Pitiful" yet? by Fnkmaster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Nice rant. I'll only bother with addressing the parts with content.

      It's an odd mentality, where the cause-and-effect here wouldn't be the obvious "Executive negligence in their company losing many jobs", but rather "the public caring that the executives cut corners and ignored signs because it would cost time and thus money resulted in this disaster, and subsequent job loss".

      I don't know how you got this from what I said. I never suggested that the public caring about the environment is to blame for lost jobs - I said that panicked vacation cancellations are to blame for more damage to local economies than the *actual* damage from the oil spill up to this point. And that a media frenzy contributes to this panic reaction.

      Oh, the punishment! Their Q2 and Q3 earnings statements will be less glowing! They may be penalized in the market, until the expected profits return! Please. Call me when they go into the red, even for a single quarter.

      Well they already have been penalized by the market. I realize that reflects expected future losses that haven't been realized yet, and that those losses in any given year probably won't be larger than their profits, but what's your point? This all reflects their assumption of a large contingent liability from this mess they created.

      You are suggesting by repeatedly using the diminutive phrase "oh noes" that this isn't *real* punishment, but you fail to make clear what you think *real* punishment for a corporate entity is. Expropriation of assets by the Federal government and transfer to a state-owned oil corporation? Forced liquidation of the firm? I put forward the suggestion that these would all fail to create additional deterrence and principally have lots of negative consequences for people that weren't at fault in this incident.

      I suggested in the first place that criminal negligence should be fully prosecuted against relevant individuals. I stand by that. Of course, many corporations would love to be able to operate under the corporate veil and never have the individuals involved assume responsibility for criminal behavior, but that doesn't mean we should let them and then run around tearing up corporate stock certificates, wringing our hands in fury, and trying in vain to make a legal fiction pay the price in a moral or retributive sense.

    19. Re:have they bought "Beyond Pitiful" yet? by Fnkmaster · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No they have not been punished. The company remains practically unscathed. The notional stock value has not impacted their profits. They're still raking in money hand over fist. At their profit margins the cost of this spill won't make any serious dent. And even if it did, they'll pull an Exxon-Valdez and tie up any judgment in court for so long that they pay a fraction of what they should.

      They have spent $1.25B. The market estimates that the total cost to BP of this fiasco will be around $100B. Now, you can argue the market is right or wrong, I personally don't think it will be quite that expensive to clean this mess up, but my point is that BP has accepted responsibility, is shelling out tons of cash, and expects to continue doing so for years to come and the most conservative estimates of that amount still are in the tens of billions of dollars.

      The only real "punishment" you can inflict on a corporate entity is costing it cash and this is costing BP dearly. You can't beat its head into the ground, you can't embarrass it, you can't tickle its feet until it cries. Beyond money, which they have already agreed to spend a shit-pot of, if something criminal went on, you have to punish the individuals responsible for the criminal activity. The threat of jail time for negligence with other people's lives is much more effective as a deterrent for individuals engaging in illegal behavior than the any fines/forced reorganization/expropriation of assets on a corporate level will ever be.

    20. Re:have they bought "Beyond Pitiful" yet? by Boomshadow · · Score: 2, Insightful

      A few problems with bicycles: 1) Range. Granted, I live in the Tampa Bay Area in Florida, where commutes are typically rated worse than anywhere else in the US, but I commute 16.9 miles each way to work--and that's with six miles on I-75, where nothing under 5 BHP is allowed (even the strongest riders average 1/2 to 1 BHP). Dropping I-75 from the route would add 1-2 miles to the run. If my boss had a shower at the office, or didn't mind me arriving in a pool of sweat, I'd consider it. 2) Passenger capacity. 99 percent of bikes have a passenger capacity of, well, one. Granted, I don't have kids, but if I want to give someone a ride--say, a client to lunch, it's a no-go. 3) Cargo space. Panniers and other saddlebags can improve cargo capacity from basically zero to at most 1 to 1.5 cubic feet. Not enough for a grocery run. I could get a trike, of course, with up to 2 cubic feet, but that would slow the commute even further than a typical road bike.

  2. In the US. by leuk_he · · Score: 4, Informative

    If i google "oil spill" here (Netherlands) it does not show sponsered links.

  3. Actually, that's surprisingly competent by rwa2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'd have expected less of them... But I guess they're doing pretty well so far with their coverage on bp.com and using dispersants to keep most of the spill at depth and keeping away science vessels so they're free to misunderestimate the true magnitude.

    Wonder what their PR budget is compared to their recovery budget.

  4. It may seem egregious and offensive by idontgno · · Score: 4, Insightful

    but this really isn't news. Money has a voice. More money has a louder voice. Lots of money can shout out all other voices.

    I hope the search providers enjoy their windfall. I hope the states, the Feds, and the individual victims of this disaster take careful note of how much money is being spent on non-productive spin control, rather than actually fixing the problem and cleaning up the aftermath.

    --
    Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    1. Re:It may seem egregious and offensive by LWATCDR · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I hate to even ask but have you gone to the site they linked to their ad? http://www.bp.com/bodycopyarticle.do?categoryId=1&contentId=7052055&nicam=USCSBaselineCrisis&nisrc=Google&nigrp=Non_Branded_Crisis_Management-_General&niadv=General&nipkw=oil_spill
      It isn't a terrible site. It is clearly marked as a BP site as well.
      No Astroturfing just a site about what they are doing.
      Totally expected and frankly people would be screaming if they had not done it.
      They also have live feeds from the ROVs which seems pretty cool
      This is so not a story but hey what do you expect?

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    2. Re:It may seem egregious and offensive by jeffmeden · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If anything, every dime they put toward stupid commercials and other PR stunts should be matched (by them) and put into a "Future of the Gulf Coast" fund where it can be used solely for long term needs to be determined at a later date. Then, in 10 years when the fisheries still are in a terrible state and BP is in a legal battle over how the cleanup was handled and what government did what without BPs consent they will have a little money to put toward rebuilding the ecology of the coast.

    3. Re:It may seem egregious and offensive by blind+biker · · Score: 2, Informative

      They also have live feeds from the ROVs which seems pretty cool

      They have those feeds because the government forced them to!. BP wasn't going to provide those feeds, it took an explicit order by the US government to achieve this "kindness".

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
  5. Can't Even Boycott the Bastards by eldavojohn · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The worst part of this oil spill is that you can't even boycott BP effectively without also boycotting the local gas station owner and the whole refinery chain. Say that this shady keyword purchasing damage control made you so upset that you went down and picketed the BP station in your neighborhood. Well, you might be affecting BP a little but you're having a much larger impact on the guy who owns that station. A huge impact if you're there all day appealing to people's empathy for the Gulf.

    What can I do? Write my senator demanding what exactly?

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Can't Even Boycott the Bastards by oh-dark-thirty · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Perhaps demand your share of relief from this spill. This will have a ripple effect on the economy for years to some, and we will all be paying for it in some way or another.

    2. Re:Can't Even Boycott the Bastards by batquux · · Score: 4, Interesting

      What can I do?

      Go to google, search for 'oil spill', and click on all the ads. Each click costs them money, and I'm sure they're bidding high for placement.

    3. Re:Can't Even Boycott the Bastards by AdmiralXyz · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You could ask the owner of the local gas station to switch to a new franchise. Most of those places are run like fast-food chains: Joe Citizen signs a multi-year renewable contract with the Company X in which he gets to use their branding, in exchange for buying gasoline from them and forking over some percentage of his revenue. Abandoning the contract early would probably cost the owner a great deal of money, though, and those guys are struggling enough as it is with the wild fluctuation in gas prices (the more it changes, the worse off they are). It would all depend on just how angry he was at BP.

      Not pretty, but convincing enough of them to switch would be the real way to harm BP. Just boycotting BP stations is pretty much useless.

      --
      Dislike the Electoral College? Lobby your state to join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact.
    4. Re:Can't Even Boycott the Bastards by magarity · · Score: 3, Informative

      Tell your senator that you want more transportation options besides automobiles
       
      Yes, because there aren't enough empty buses and light rail trains rumbling around town.

  6. Brings a tear to my eye... by Psiren · · Score: 3, Funny

    Suddenly I'm proud to be British. God save the Queen!

    1. Re:Brings a tear to my eye... by lennier1 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Where's The Doctor when you need him?

  7. Obligatory twitter quote by jeffmeden · · Score: 3, Funny

    @BPGlobalPR

    By the way, we made it so if you google image search "oil spill" or "bp" you'll see some great celeb sideboob pics. #bpcares

    Ah, the fun we poke.

  8. Re:Who Cares by qoncept · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is a pretty ignorant, if rhetorical, question. Along the lines of asking what good replacing a 100w incandescent light bulb with a 23w CFL is in the grand scheme of things. The answer? The single light bulb and the single PR marketing action make virtually no impact. Are they pointless?

    BP obviously wants to continue operating and overcome this disaster. Regardless of what other actions they take, do you think that is possible WITHOUT trying to boost their image through PR?

    --
    Whale
  9. Re:Who Cares by GameMaster · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yes. It worked, for the most part, for Exxon and Union Carbide. They'll, probably, just try to play by the play-book those two companies used. History shows that the public has a short memory/attention span.

    --

    Rules of Conduct:
    #1 - The DM is always right.
    #2 - If the DM is wrong, see rule #1
  10. BP - "One of the World Leaders in Oil Spills" by statusbar · · Score: 3, Funny

    BP - "One of the World Leaders in Oil Spills and Public Relations Damage Control"

    Have you spilled oil today? Our P.R. team can help!

    --
    ipv6 is my vpn
  11. Re:Who Cares by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Given that they've been at the "warmer, fuzzier, more baby-seal-loving, oil company" PR game for something like a decade now(I'm guessing that they might be doing a little less advertising in National Geographic in the near future; but they were all over the place with their "Beyond Petroleum" spin) I'd assume that they have an entrenched internal culture that is convinced of exactly that.

    Given the public's relatively short attention span, and the fervor of the ostensibly-libertarian-but-basically-authoritarian-corporatist wing, which blithely asserts that any state interference in the sovereign right of corporations to do whatever the fuck they want, or even say mean things when the inevitable consequences occur, is socialist fascism; they may well be correct.

  12. So... I can transfer money from BP to Google? by localman57 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    So let me get this straight... I can go to Google, type in "oil spill" then click on one of BP's sponsored links. And in the act of doing this, I can magically transfer money, real money, from a company that fucked up the environment to one that gives me free software like Chrome, and Google Earth, and Android?

    Hell yeah!

    1. Re:So... I can transfer money from BP to Google? by RivenAleem · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Now what we need is a press release from Google saying that all revenue generated from the BP add goes towards helping clean the spillage.

      Then we can just sit back while BP goes bankrupt (though I suspect there's an upper limit to the cost of the add...)

    2. Re:So... I can transfer money from BP to Google? by blair1q · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No it wouldn't. BP contracted with Google for visibility and clicks. Google contracted with BP for payment. BP gets its visibility and clicks, and Google gets its payment.

      It's no business of BP's how Google drives traffic to BP or what Google does with the money, unless the contract itself contains limitations on those things.

      Moral: when selling your soul, make sure you read what you sign.

  13. Speaking of which... by The+MAZZTer · · Score: 3, Funny

    I guess if you can't plug your spill, the least you can do is try to clog the flow of information.

    Related: http://digg.com/comedy/Massive_Flow_Of_Bull****_Continues_To_Gush_From_BP

  14. I get 2 sponsored links right now by Rockoon · · Score: 4, Informative

    One is to:

    www.BP.com/OilSpillNews "Info about the Gulf of Mexico Spill Learn More about How BP is Helping."

    The other is:

    Tar Ball Burner(tm) "Collect free tar balls from beaches and turn them into unleaded gas!"

    Please slashdot both of them.

    --
    "His name was James Damore."
  15. Ha, jokes on them by harris+s+newman · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Wait till they declare a profit this quarter. The whole country will draw and quarter them.

  16. Surprisingly Competant for an Evil Villain by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Interesting

    But I guess they're doing pretty well so far with their coverage on bp.com and using dispersants to keep most of the spill at depth and keeping away science vessels so they're free to misunderestimate the true magnitude.

    Science vessels? According to Newsweek, it's photographers and people looking to document the damage that BP is turning away. Now that's some unadulterated bullshit "damage control."

    I heard on NPR that some people looking to investigate beaches were turned away by policeman and when they asked the policemen who was paying them to do that the policeman said they were off duty police officers employed by BP. I don't know if that's true or if the people are lying but the stinks worse than crude if it's the truth and I hope the US AG criminal investigation gets to the bottom of that.

    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:Surprisingly Competant for an Evil Villain by AGMW · · Score: 2, Informative

      I heard on NPR that some people looking to investigate beaches were turned away by policeman and when they asked the policemen who was paying them to do that the policeman said they were off duty police officers employed by BP. I don't know if that's true ...

      ... but I'm going to spread the rumour anyway because it shows BP in a bad light and BP are the current people we love to hate.

      A friend of mine said BP wanted to use mashed up baby dolphins to try and plug the leak, but I don't know if it's true ...

      --
      Eclectic beats from Leeds, UK
      handmadehands.co.uk
  17. Clog the flow of information? by mea37 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Relax, dude, I'm pretty sure we can all find plenty of things to blame BP for without pretending that buying keyword impressions is somehow harmful.

    Go google "oil spill". Sure enough, the top sponsored link will be the BP oil spill site. The other sponsored link will be... yet another partison point of view from someone who was willing to pay to get a message out. That's what sponsored links are.

    Right below them - right where they always are - you still find the real search results. How that squares with the flow of information being "clogged" is beyond me.

    I'd find more to complain about if BP wasn't trying to present a strong media presence. You know, saying "I'd like my life back" or something like that.

  18. Re:Sign Sign Everywhere a Sign by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2, Informative

    Hey, be fair! They didn't leave their pumps unattended. 11 of the attendees died.

  19. Re:Who Cares by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The Valdez incident was in a fairly unpopulated part of a state with a very small population. Union Carbide was in India, and thus not only a long way off, but impacting foreigners.

    This is literally happening in a very populated, economically important region of the Continental United States. I mean, these people still talk about Hurricane Andrew, so no, I don't think they'll be forgetting how BP poisoned the Gulf Coast.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  20. Re:They really ought to save their money by ProdigyPuNk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You're out of your mind if you think they are going to get the bill for "what they have destroyed". I'm sure they'll be fined an amount that SEEMS like a lot to everyday joes, but is in fact next to meaningless to a huge corp. like BP. A big enough fine should preclude them from declaring any profit for that quarter - wait and see, I'm sure they'll be declaring plenty of profit...

  21. Its pretty straightforward actually by retardpicnic · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Completely BS writeup of the article. This is a straightforward and common tactic used by companies in situations like this. Yes, with all the band-wagoning and rhetoric surrounding the issue its not even a bad idea. The spill is obviously a tragedy of incredible proportions, which invites entirely too much disinformation, half truth and anecdotal evidence. No matter what BP did here they would be crucified for either having no strategy, or (like the poster did) assuming the strategy was a CYA move. Everyone is so busy hating right now must forget that BP was a darling until this happened. They gave 7 million to politicians last year, testified before congress, were given one of the largest tax breaks in history by the bush regime. we all helped create this monster. live with it.

    --
    sig loading.......
  22. Re:Who Cares by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm saying at this point I don't think they can boost their image. Wasting money on PR seems like throwing money down the toilet. There's a point at which you're so reviled that any attempt to make yourself look less despicable only feeds into the negative view the public has of you.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  23. Re:Who Cares by MightyMartian · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I just typed "gulf oil spill" in Google. What I came up with is three stories; one about Obama trying to deflect criticism about his handling of the spill, one about the confirmation of oil plumes (and once again BP is caught lying, BTW), and one about the fight to contain the oil spill to last months.

    About the only really questionable one is a site obviously put up by BP called gulfoilspill.com, and it's a helluva laugh to read.

    Google is not giving BP good PR. In fact, because of its news scanning, it's putting negative news stories at the top of the results.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  24. Re:Who Cares by delinear · · Score: 5, Informative

    You do realise that they've bought an ad space, they're not paying to bury all the other organic search results. It's one ad that appears in the clearly marked sponsored area and links to a page that gives some information about how they're trying (and failing) to do anything, with some webcams and a pitiful "have you got any ideas to help?" request. It's hardly preventing people finding the information they want, any more than Dulux are trying to destroy our cultural heritage by preventing us accessing information on the great artists because they show an ad when I search for "painting".

  25. Re:Who Cares by MightyMartian · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Well of course we need oil. We need gold too, but would you just shrug your shoulders if they were mining it in your backyard and managed to poison your property with mercury? That we need various commodities doesn't mean that we should give companies free passes on damage.

    I never understand the sort of equivocation posters like you put forth. What does that even mean? Oh well, we've got to put up with the destruction of economically important fisheries and tourist areas because WE NEED OIL! I mean, that's the justification of a drug addict, not of a sensible individual.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  26. Re:Who Cares by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Insightful

    They have tried to minimize the spill. They're estimates were bullshit. They're claim that there were no plumes is bullshit. Their claim that they're fully funding the cleanup is bullshit. They got called out very publicly by a group of Gulf coast mayors who literally had to crash a press conference where their reps were coating themselves in all sorts of nauseating platitudes to reveal that BP hasn't even returned these guys' phone calls.

    What BP should do is apologize about fifty times a day, do what it's claiming it's doing, stop trying to bullshit everyone about the extent of the damage, and goddamn well take what's coming to it. I mean, these are oil patch guys, but they're behaving like a bunch of stupid pissy prissies.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  27. Re:Who Cares by aicrules · · Score: 4, Informative

    While it may be good PR for them to have what they have on the Oil Spill link, it actually IS a very helpful link versus the rest of the results. Have you actually looked at what they have on that page? While the highlighted area is basically to let people know what they are doing, there is a bunch of very useful information and links also on that page. Important phone numbers, links to the four State response websites, ROV footage...stuff that they don't HAVE to put on a "Damage Control" link. They may only have done it because that was the only way to have any hope of repairing their image once this is over, but it's a better source of information that most of the other links you'll find in the results. AND it's in the sponsored link section, clearly pointing out that it's not just a run of the mill search result.

  28. Re:Somebody should buy BP by cowscows · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The only problem is that there's no good solution here. BP's people aren't the only ones trying to stop the leak, you've got engineers from all of the big companies working on this. They all see the damage that this spill is doing to their industry and want it stopped. The point is that nobody knows how to stop this, short of relief wells. There's already a ton of uncertainty about how much oil has leaked, how much more is going to leak, what's going to happen to all that oil under the water, what happens when a hurricane tears through the gulf, whether or not the oil will find its way around florida and up the east coast, and who knows what else is going to happen in the next 6-8 weeks before the relief wells have drilled deep enough.

    There's just way too much uncertainty about when the leak will be fixed, what the actual ecological and economic damage will be, and how hard the government will eventually come down on BP. I don't think that anyone who really looks at the situation could reliably predict what sort of financial liabilities you'd be purchasing if you bought BP. You'd be insane to seriously consider buying them right now.

    --

    One time I threw a brick at a duck.

  29. Why are we supposed to be angry again? by unjedai · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So BP is spending their money on ads for a relevant search term and when you click on the ad you are lead to information on what they are doing with the oil spill. And we're supposed to be angry at them for doing this? Huh? Maybe their info is bogus or they should be providing more info. Maybe they have totally botched the oil spill. But it would make more sense to me if people were outraged if they DIDN'T buy ads that lead people to information.

  30. Re:I honestly don't blame them by MightyMartian · · Score: 2, Informative

    Ah yes, the ol' "the media is evil vs. the just-a-little-evil-company/politician/organization".

    Whatever the media has been doing, it's BP whose spinning is making things worse. They lied about the amount of oil leaking. They tried to deny there were oil plumes, basically calling a number of experts alarmists. They've bullshitted about the amount of aid they've been providing, the amount of work they've been doing on the cleanup.

    BP isn't just "not perfect", it's a pack of self-serving liars who, on top of everything else, are too fucking stupid to realize that every line of bullshit they try to foist on the public gets them in even more trouble.

    The truth may not set you free, but sometimes it at least can mitigate the damage. If they had said three or four weeks ago "we could be leaking up to 20,000 barrels a day", yes, they would have gone a lot of bad press, but at least the bad press wouldn't have involved "you're lying bastards". The same with the oil plumes.

    The people that caused this disaster were BP. The people who are creating a fair amount of the bad PR is BP. As the old saying goes, "blaming the press is like a captain blaming the sea".

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  31. Re:Who Cares by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 2, Insightful

    There's a point at which you're so reviled that any attempt to make yourself look less despicable only feeds into the negative view the public has of you.

    Damn, and I just ran out of mod points.

    This is the feeling I and everyone I know gets when we see BP commercials about how they're fixing stuff. "STFU and get back to work." No one wants to hear BP talk about how hard they're working. The only thing anyone is interested in hearing is "The leak is plugged, the oil has been skimmed, and life is returning to normal." Anything else just backfires and makes BPs image worse.

    If I were in BP's shoes, I'd buy ad space and show a live 30-second feed of the rovers, the meetings and engineers cranking away in cubicles and on boats.

    --
    Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
  32. Re:Who Cares by UnknowingFool · · Score: 3, Interesting
    While both incidents were unfortunate, I'd have to put BP in a different class than Exxon and Union Carbide. For the most part the two companies haven't had many major disasters or accidents in their long history. BP on the other hand have had 2 other major incidents in the last 5 years. Over the last 3 years, BP has recorded 760 OSHA safety violations. Their competitors:
    • Sunoco, 8
    • Conoco-Phillips, 8
    • Citgo, 2
    • Exxon, 1

    In order words, BP has almost 40x the incidents than all their competitors combined.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  33. Well, almost everything... by Chris+Burke · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Anyone who honestly thinks BP isn't doing E V E R Y T H I N G in its power to stem the flow is a fool.

    I believe that BP has every incentive to stop the leak.

    I also believe BP has every incentive to do so as cheaply as possible. For instance, they originally wanted to only drill one relief well until Congress insisted they start on another one. Why? Well because a relief well is not a guaranteed fixe. Sometimes the first one you drill doesn't do much, assuming you even succeed in hitting the foot-wide hole with the other foot-wide hole you're drilling at an angle through miles of rock.

    I am not about to second-guess the engineers who are busting their ass working on fixes. I fully realize that what they are trying to do is exceedingly difficult -- I mean, that's part of why it's such a big problem. However that also applies to the relief wells. With the problems that keep coming up in all the other attempted solutions, just assuming that a single relief well will work on the first try seems ludicrous. Could the extra cost possibly outweigh the impact if the relief well fails and oil spews until they can go through the whole process of drilling another? Could you, as an engineer, justify that lack of redundancy when solving a problem of this magnitude?

    But those decisions aren't made by engineers. Engineers quantify the risks as best they can, and executives make the decision off the summary middle management hands them. For them, maybe the cost vs risk works out? Maybe a mentality that you cut corners and do the minimum (or less) and just hope things work out is so entrenched that they would still try it even after things had already failed to work out?

    And not that I don't think their Top Kill attempt was anything but sincere, but that's exactly why it strikes me as odd that you'd mention that $700000/day figure for siphoning oil as some kind of incentive for plugging the well. When they really fix the well it won't be usable anymore. So no more oil. Which gives them the opposite incentive. Again, this is just the thought train your observation led me down.

    --

    The enemies of Democracy are