3 ms·

Leroy Stick – the man behind @BPGlobalPR

47 points by jasonlbaptiste 16y ago

ErrantX 16y ago
He makes some points, except: because the oil spill had been going on for almost a month and all BP had to offer were bullshit PR statements. No solutions, no urgency, no sincerity, no nothing. I don't believe that can be true. a) because clearly it is in BP's interests (whichever way you look at it) to plug the leak and b) there are lots of engineers working on this and I seriously doubt they are dragging their feet in trying to come up with solutions! (that seems disingenuous at best) I worry about this actually because, clearly, it's a complex problem (look at the difficulty HN had coming up with working solutions!). But the public don't seem to understand this; on the radio yesterday one of the talk shows was discussing this and the overriding opinions (this was a UK show btw) were along the lines of "why are the US government not fixing this", "where are all the military scientists", "when are BP going to let the government try to fix this". One delightful man explained how BP "clearly had no experience at this" and "what about NASA - they are nearby and are able to send drones to Mars"...
- CaptainZapp 16y ago
  From http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/feature/2010/06/01/engineer_gulf_spill_open2010/index.html http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/feature/2010/06/01/enginee... Choice Quote : 1. Stop releasing dispersants. So-called dispersants are toxic, and it's crazy to add more poison to the Gulf. Dispersants do nothing to assist the environment in naturally cleaning the oil; their main use is PR. They reduce the number of ugly pictures of birds covered in pure black crude. Dispersants break the thick layer of crude into smaller globs, but that doesn’t help the Gulf and its wildlife. Most of the crude just mixes with the water to produce a goop that looks like chocolate ice cream but is highly poisonous. If this is true, and frankly, I don't mdoubt the statement then I think Leroy Stick is really on to something. Including the statement you single out.
  - hugh3 16y ago
    and frankly, I don't mdoubt the statement You don't doubt the statement of an unnamed "petroleum engineer" which got quoted on some guy's blog? Honestly I have no idea what the upsides and downsides of oil dispersants are, but these things are rarely as clear-cut as this guy wants to imply.
    - CaptainZapp 16y ago
      I certainly trust the unnammed petroleum engineer more then BPs PR machinery. Especially since this is not the first time I learn how bad those dispersants are. In addition; you can think about Salon what you want. But it's certainly not "some guys blog". Your mileage may vary, of course.
- yellowbkpk 16y ago
  There are several problems I've seen with BP's response: - My perception (and I doubt I'm alone) is that they reacted extremely slowly. First by playing the blame game, then by (seemingly) choosing responses that have been proven to fail in the past (and in the exact same order) and in order of cost. - The faces of BP on television (the CEO and various spokespeople) have been evasive and not emotive in their expressions during interviews. The public wants to see that the people in charge care about this, not just hear words. - The cleanup effort has been ineffectual at best. From incorrectly placing booms to throwing toxic dispersants at the oil, there is no concerted, visible effort (at least compare to what I would expect from a company with the resources that BP has) to solve the problem of environmental damage. - BP has actively barred the media (both indie and "professional") from documenting the spill beyond the photo ops approved by BP.

He makes some points, except: because the oil spill had been going on for almost a month and all BP had to offer were bullshit PR statements. No solutions, no urgency, no sincerity, no nothing. I don't believe that can be true. a) because clearly it is in BP's interests (whichever way you look at it) to plug the leak and b) there are lots of engineers working on this and I seriously doubt they are dragging their feet in trying to come up with solutions! (that seems disingenuous at best) I worry about this actually because, clearly, it's a complex problem (look at the difficulty HN had coming up with working solutions!). But the public don't seem to understand this; on the radio yesterday one of the talk shows was discussing this and the overriding opinions (this was a UK show btw) were along the lines of "why are the US government not fixing this", "where are all the military scientists", "when are BP going to let the government try to fix this". One delightful man explained how BP "clearly had no experience at this" and "what about NASA - they are nearby and are able to send drones to Mars"...

CaptainZapp 16y ago
From http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/feature/2010/06/01/engineer_gulf_spill_open2010/index.html http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/feature/2010/06/01/enginee... Choice Quote : 1. Stop releasing dispersants. So-called dispersants are toxic, and it's crazy to add more poison to the Gulf. Dispersants do nothing to assist the environment in naturally cleaning the oil; their main use is PR. They reduce the number of ugly pictures of birds covered in pure black crude. Dispersants break the thick layer of crude into smaller globs, but that doesn’t help the Gulf and its wildlife. Most of the crude just mixes with the water to produce a goop that looks like chocolate ice cream but is highly poisonous. If this is true, and frankly, I don't mdoubt the statement then I think Leroy Stick is really on to something. Including the statement you single out.
- hugh3 16y ago
  and frankly, I don't mdoubt the statement You don't doubt the statement of an unnamed "petroleum engineer" which got quoted on some guy's blog? Honestly I have no idea what the upsides and downsides of oil dispersants are, but these things are rarely as clear-cut as this guy wants to imply.
  - CaptainZapp 16y ago
    I certainly trust the unnammed petroleum engineer more then BPs PR machinery. Especially since this is not the first time I learn how bad those dispersants are. In addition; you can think about Salon what you want. But it's certainly not "some guys blog". Your mileage may vary, of course.
yellowbkpk 16y ago
There are several problems I've seen with BP's response: - My perception (and I doubt I'm alone) is that they reacted extremely slowly. First by playing the blame game, then by (seemingly) choosing responses that have been proven to fail in the past (and in the exact same order) and in order of cost. - The faces of BP on television (the CEO and various spokespeople) have been evasive and not emotive in their expressions during interviews. The public wants to see that the people in charge care about this, not just hear words. - The cleanup effort has been ineffectual at best. From incorrectly placing booms to throwing toxic dispersants at the oil, there is no concerted, visible effort (at least compare to what I would expect from a company with the resources that BP has) to solve the problem of environmental damage. - BP has actively barred the media (both indie and "professional") from documenting the spill beyond the photo ops approved by BP.