Twittering 'Sweet
Lies': The Corporate Co-opting of Social Media
"In
the hands of political activists, this type of communication is a powerful tool
in persuading people to become active. But in the hands of large corporations, tweets
can also be used as a propaganda tool in the battle for public opinion - by
companies like BP, for example."
In the peaceful revolutions
of Tunisia and Egypt, tweets - news disseminated through the Twitter communications
platform - played a major role in rapidly mobilizing the masses and disseminating
information about important events, virtually in real time.
In the hands of political
activists, this type of communication is a powerful tool in persuading people
to become active. But in the hands of large corporations, tweets can also be
used as a propaganda tool in the battle for public opinion - by companies like
BP, for example.
Do you still recall? There was some
sort of oil rig explosion last year? And afterwards, what happened? There was
an oil spill - that’s right. Although it was more of an oil poisoning, an
assault on nature by oil. “Oil spill” has such an inevitable, epidemic-like ring
to it. Safety procedures were skimped on and time constraints led to shortcuts.
Fatal shortcuts. The result was a gigantic oil spill.
But no sooner had the oil
well been capped, than one could read in conservative publications: it’s not
nearly as bad as we thought! According to these sources, the oil was
disappearing very, very quickly - all by itself. The oil-eating bacteria were
having a real party and, in the end, the oil spill was actually a positive thing
for the Gulf of Mexico. On top of that, BP was paying all claimants lots of
money really quickly.
So, an oil rig explodes, and
somehow, one is given the impression that after all, it was a really great thing. And BP
would like to keep giving that impression, and it has been tweeting
enthusiastically for months about how well the cleanup operations went, how
clean the water is, how beautiful the beaches are, and how delicious seafood
from the Gulf of Mexico is.
“A new study shows that
bacteria consumed all of the methane from the spilled oil more quickly than
expected.” That’s great, isn’t it? But not so great. Experts who continue to study
the effects of the Gulf spill are of a different opinion. The leading expert, marine
biologist Samantha
Joye of the University of Georgia, says that it’s much more likely that the
oil plume in the water has moved on and that the measurements were, quite
simply, taken in the wrong place - in the immediate vicinity of the capped oil
well.
Commenting further on the
oil’s decomposition in the water and the sea floor, Ms. Joye even noted that
this would be slower than previously thought - not faster, as researchers
supported by BP have claimed.
But why bother following links
in a tweet when the diminished truth is so beautiful. At least as beautiful as
the Gulf Coast beaches in one BP tweet: “BP cleanup operations are ‘on track’
with the goal of cleaning Gulf beaches by the spring tourist season - the
beaches are beautiful!”
Yes! That’s what we want to
hear, right? All is well and those college students are going to party like
crazy … as long as they don’t bury themselves in the sand, since there's still
oil underneath in some spots. And even where the sand is clean, some business
owners are giving up: after a summer without guests, there are also no reservations
for the spring.
But why? BP is assuming all
the losses, right? Perhaps because it isn't enough to tweet the links to claim
forms when, after being filled out and submitted, they get processed so slowly.
Of course, it’s only good and right to ensure that no one is over-compensated
or given special treatment. But, as anyone who has ever owned a business knows, ten
months without income is enough to sink a successful business. And once
someone is broke and ruined, there’s also a good chance that they won’t be
fighting for any further damages.
Posted by WORLDMEETS.US
Also of interest is the safety
of seafood currently being harvested in the Gulf. For instance, it isn't at
all clear what kind of toxins may develop. Officially, BP is looking for so-called
PAHs (polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons) and proudly tweets that seafood from the Gulf is the
“safest” there is, because testing is so rigorous. But other tests not
conducted by the government detect long-chained hydrocarbons for which tests have
apparently not been conducted - and in concentrations that could potentially
lead to liver damage, although their effect on humans remains unclear. This
lack of clarity is then used as a pretext to do nothing and to keep following a
leave-it-to-chance approach.
Which, naturally, BP is not tweeting
about. And why should they? When it comes to rewriting a story to your own advantage,
tweeting sweet lies and half-truths is surely better and much more
appropriate than the naked truth.
