In defense of BP's response to the oil spill

Steven Pearlstein of the Washington Post gives it a try. For those not paying much attention to the crisis, maybe it sounds fine. BP has not "cut and run" but they've hardly been transparent either. ABC News dove into the oil leak which provided us with a good look of what's going on inside the oil being treated with dispersants. BP has been much more reluctant to show anything other than the one underwater view they want people to see. They repeatedly provided a low oil leak count even after experts said otherwise.

As far as financially supporting the disaster recovery, to a degree yes, but why are workers getting sick and why are health clinics not receiving immediate financial assistance from BP? This is yet another good reason why the US government should demand money from BP and take control of payments. How could BP really have the resources that are available from FEMA for such disasters?

Concerning BP being open, pleading the 5th Amendment doesn't sound like "open" to me. BP may have shared some data with a Congressional committee but obviously there's more to tell. BP could have been worse but they're hardly creating a new example for business school MBA crisis management courses either. Then again, maybe they are and that is the problem.