A Perspective on Exxon Valdez Oil Spill
Exxon Valdez oil spill
|
|
Location
|
|
Coordinates
|
|
Date
|
March 24, 1989; 27 years ago
|
Cause
|
|
Cause
|
|
Operator
|
|
Spill characteristics
|
|
Volume
|
|
Area
|
11,000 sq mi (28,000 km2)
|
Shoreline impacted
|
1,300 mi (2,100 km)
|
Background: An oil tanker from Exxon which named Exxon
Valdez underwent oil spill crisis on Friday, March 24, 1989.
Location: After the oil tanker hit reef, it leaked massive crude oil in Prince
William Sound. Prince William Sound was abundance of sea life. As a result, the
crude oil spill not only polluted the environment around Alaska, it also had a
negative impact on sea life in Sound. Besides that, people had a fear to travel
to Alaska.
Situation Analysis: The
strength for Exxon to handle the crisis was that Exxon was such a big company
that it could afford the loss and compassion for the oil spill. Don Cornet
clearly realized and analyzed the situation and looked ahead to a long-term
future. The weakness was Exxon did not have a public relation manager in the
company before the oil spill happened. It would make Exxon hard to early find
the prodromes and shortly prevent the crisis. The opportunity for the company
to cope with the crisis was Exxon had already set up animal rescue centers on
Veldez. It was easy for Exxon to save the sea life. The threat for the company
to handle the crisis was that the corporate culture was not good. On one hand,
the CEO—Lawrence G. Rawl did not like publicity and the media. It hindered the
communication between Exxon and the public. On the other hand, the employees
thought the company cut the crews and made employees worked too long. This
would made the public reconsidered about Exxon and damaged the image of Exxon. According to official reports, the ship was carrying
approximately 54 million US gallons (200,000 m3) of oil,
of which about 10.8 million US gallons (260,000 bbl; 41,000 m3)
were spilled into the Prince William Sound. Multiple
factors have been identified as contributing to the incident:
Beginning
three days after the vessel grounded, a storm pushed large quantities of fresh
oil on to the rocky shores of many of the beaches in the Knight Island chain.[12] In this photograph, pooled black oil is shown stranded in the rocks
Strategies: After the crisis happened, different departments in the Exxon had done
lots of measures to handle the crisis. They were:
1.
The immediate strategy
was to clean the crude oil up as quickly as possible and recover normalcy to
Alaska.
2.
Iarossi fired the
captain of Exxon Veldez—Hazelwood.
3.
Cornet set up a media center
in Valdez for reporters and photographers.
4.
Don Cornet reported the
situation to the head of public affairs and swiftly arrived at the Alaska.
5.
Iarossi held a press
conference.
6.
CEO Rawl refused to go to the
site and thought “technologically obsolete.”
7.
Cornet asked Mason to handle
the bad effect on the tourism industry and sea animals.
8.
Manson referred a public
relations agency in Anchorage to help cope with bad impact on the seafood
industry in Alaska.
9.
The media tours and guidelines
were planed to the Exxon animal rescue centers.
10. News conferences were held to convince public that Alaska’s tourism
industry was not affected by the spill.
11. Exxon funded an advertising campaign to encourage Alaska’s tourism.
Effects of the disaster:
Wildlife was severely affected by the oil spill.
Both
the long-term and short-term effects of the oil spill have been studied. Immediate
effects included the deaths of 100,000 to as many as 250,000 seabirds. In 2003,
fifteen years after the spill, a team from the University of North
Carolina found that the remaining oil was lasting far longer than anticipated,
which in turn had resulted in more long-term loss of many species than had been
expected. In 2006, a study done by the
National Marine Fisheries Service in Juneau found that about 6 miles
(9.7 km) of shoreline around Prince William Sound was still affected by
the spill, with 101.6 tonnes of oil remaining in the area. As of
2010 there were an estimated 23,000 US gallons (87 m3) of
Valdez crude oil still in Alaska's sand and soil, breaking down at a rate
estimated at less than 4% per year. On March 24, 2014, the twenty-fifth
anniversary of the spill, NOAA scientists reported that some species seem to
have recovered, with the sea otter the latest creature to return to pre-spill
numbers. Scientists who have monitored the spill area for the last 25 years
report that concern remains for one of two pods of local orca whales, with
fears that one pod may eventually die out.
After the crisis struck, the
different strategies in the company received different responds from the
public. They were:
1.
When Irsossi blamed Captain
Hazelwood and Third Mate Cousins, some Exxon employees thought that the
corporate also had its own problems. The over fatigue to work for the company
was responsible for the accident.
2.
When CEO Rawl did not care
about the crisis, the media, the fishermen, the environmentalists, and the
public were angry.
3.
Customers canceled their Exxon
credit cards.
4.
When Alaska Governor Cooper
attended to the news conferences and mentioned the beautiful Alaska, people
believed him and release the fear to travel to Alaska
Findings: When the oil spill happened, Don Cornet showed regret to publics. Iarossi
fired Captain Hazelwood for his fault. Third Mate Cousins was blamed by
publics. It well explained Apologia Theory, especially redefinition. Exxon
never committed the company’s guilty. It seemed that the fault came from
Hazelwood. If Hazelwood kept his post, the oil spill would not have happened.
Exxon communicated to its public that it did not “intend” to commit the
misdeed. However, the textbook also referred that employees complained about
working too long and leading to human fatigue. I think there are really some
problems on their corporate culture. A company who has a strong corporate
culture would consider every employee to be their members. If Exxon thinks like
this, it will commit their fault without casting the most responsibility to
Captain Hazelwood. Besides that, Exxon should apologize for the public, not
only showing their regret. The image restoration theory is also applied in this
case. For example, when Exxon considered the negative impact on Alaska’s
tourism, they held news conferences and advertising campaign to restore its
image. I think it is a correct method to handle this part of the crisis. Cornet
set up a media center for reporters and photographers in Valdez. Exxon invited
Alaska Governor Cooper to be their external public speaker to attend the news
conferences, the public trusted his speech. These two strategies shows that
Exxon tends to form alliances with media and external groups to make them feel
like they are the part of the company. Besides that, I appreciate that Exxon
opened the animal rescue center for the media and community. Exxon realized
that they should not only do what is right. It also must tell its public that
it is taking appropriate action. From this case, I think that oil companies
should think about the oil spill crisis. Moreover, they also have to consider
something that seems impossibly happen. A crisis a company determines to be
impossible only because it has never happened before can happen tomorrow.
Therefore, a company has to make a crisis communication plan. When facing a
similar crisis, I will recommend that CEO in the company to be the speaker. He
is the most credibility with publics and the media. He should realize the
importance of public relations. Once the crisis strikes, the speaker has to
report the fact of crisis and take measures to hand the crisis during the
“golden hours”.
·
http://schoolworkhelper.net/exxon-valdez-oil-spill-overview-summary/.
·
Thomas, Pierre; Weiser, Benjamin (13 April 1996). "Reputed 'Manifesto' Recovered". The Washington Post. p. A01. Retrieved 28 January 2011.
Thomas, Pierre; Weiser, Benjamin (13 April 1996). "Reputed 'Manifesto' Recovered". The Washington Post. p. A01. Retrieved 28 January 2011.
·
Betrayal and Courage in the
Wake of the Exxon Valdez Oil Spill by Riki Ott (2008). Published by Chelsea
Green Publishing. 352p.
·
The Spill: Personal Stories
from the Exxon Valdez Disaster by Stan Jones and Sharon Bushell (2009).
Published by Epicenter Press. 288p.
No comments:
Post a Comment