If a picture paints a thousand words then the impact of these images is probably larger than any of their editorial pages on the subject. That's also a risk because by selecting the images you could make it appear more or less worse than it really is.
This selection though, does not give me the impression that they've done that, however that may be the art. Still, if this is 'all there is' the problem is of an unbelievable magnitude.
People keep comparing this to the Exxon Valdez spill, and while there are parallels I can't help but notice that that happened in a much less populated area of the world, and even this many years on there is still surface oil to be found there, and it still affects the local wildlife.
The comparisons to the Exxon Valdez are really over wrought, there really isn't a lot in common
- The Exxon Valdez was a static amount of oil, we knew how much there was immediately. We can only estimate the amount of oil leaking here and nobody can accurately predict the date when it will finally be shut off. The whole "we have to stop the leak" part was missing in the Exxon Valdez, frankly that is the pressing crisis now.
- The Prince William Sound is very enclosed compared to the Gulf of Mexico. The concentration in the Gulf is much lower, we won't be seeing anything as bad as the 2" thick crude oil goo covering everything in sight because the oil is spread out relatively thinly across a huge surface. On one hand that is good because it will break down faster naturally, on the other hand it makes corralling really hard to do, the area is massive. June and July are very timid months for weather in the Gulf because the water and land are very similar temperatures, what happens in the fall when hurricanes start rolling through the oil patch? It is going to be hitting everywhere. We lucked out that for the first few days the prevailing wind was from the northwest, but as soon as it turned around all hell broke loose.
- There are marshes in the Gulf. Suffice to say cleaning the oil out from between blades of grass is a lot harder than off of rocky beaches.
- Exxon got a lot of blame in 1989, BP has been lucky enough to have this widely labeled the "Gulf of Mexico oil spill" or the "Spill in the Gulf", the gulf of mexico did not spill the oil, BP did. Make a point to correct people who incorrectly label the spill.
The fact that it was in a must less populated part of the world, in many ways make the Exxon disaster worse. Since we have so many people on the ground, observing the effects of the BP disaster when they walk down the beach, or try to go fishing, the effects will be harder to hide.
And with things like twitter and facebook, we have a great way for the ordinary person to keep the pressure on.
Also, the amount of oil being released here is huge, and it is going to affect a much larger area, if it does not disperse quickly. Lets just hope they get this under control.
From what I have read, people at BP/Haliburton should go to jail for letting the drilling go ahead, when there was damage to the saftey mechanisms.
This selection though, does not give me the impression that they've done that, however that may be the art. Still, if this is 'all there is' the problem is of an unbelievable magnitude.
People keep comparing this to the Exxon Valdez spill, and while there are parallels I can't help but notice that that happened in a much less populated area of the world, and even this many years on there is still surface oil to be found there, and it still affects the local wildlife.