Yesterday was a record-breaking day, in terms of traffic, on the Line 6B Citizens’ Blog. We don’t know if that is attributable to Enbridge’s letter in the Detroit Free Press— though if it is, we’d like to thank them for the little boost! Whatever the case, we are grateful to everyone who stops by, we hope you’ll return, and we’ll continue to try and make it worth your while.
In this post, we’ll wrap up our extended discussion of the Enbridge letter/ad. If you missed the earlier installments, please take a look at parts 1 and 2 and 3. We left off last time wondering about audience– just who, exactly, Enbridge hopes to reach with these advertisements, which they address to their “neighbors.” As we said before, those of us on phase one of the project don’t really need any of the information Enbridge promises to provide. So perhaps the audience is those landowners who will be affected by phase two of the project. Or perhaps Enbridge simply wants to reach the public at large. Their last paragraph seems to support the latter possibility:
As part of our commitment to open communication with the community, we have enhanced our website with more details on the projects and our toll-free hotline is always available for community members who may have additional questions about the projects. We value the relationships we have developed over more than 40 years of pipeline operation in Michigan and we look forward to continuing those relationships, which are built on trust and ethical dealings with all stakeholders.
“Open communication with the community.” Okay. But what community, exactly? and why this professed devotion to “open communication” now, at this late stage in the game? On that last question, we’ll hazard a guess: to Enbridge all of this is nothing more than a PR campaign. It’s not about what’s true or fair or right. It’s simply about some imaginary battle over public perception. They seem to think that if they can shape those perceptions– by throwing around warm-sounding terms and phrases like “neighbor” and “open communication” and “relationships” and “trust and ethical dealings,” regardless of whether their actions demonstrate that those terms actually mean something– then they’ll get to have their way.
Yet here on this blog we have provided so many examples of how Enbridge’s actions are at odds with their rhetoric that we hardly have the energy to link back to them again (but please feel free to ramble through the archives!). So instead we’ll just say once more what we’ve said so many times already:
For some reason that we can’t fathom, Enbridge seems to prefer waging legal and PR battles, rather than just doing things right from the start. If they really had honored 40 year relationships and operated trustfully and ethically, we wouldn’t be here today. We all would have moved on long ago. We’d all be making plans to rebuild our backyards. We’d be enjoying our kids’ soccer games. We’d be playing with our dogs. We’d be devoting our time to work and family and friends. To the extent that Enbridge does have a public relations problem– although that phrase in no way reflects the truth of the matter– it is entirely a problem of their own making. A handful of ads in the newspaper isn’t going to change that. And the fact that Enbridge thinks they can change it just goes to show how unwilling they are to genuinely reflect upon their own actions and practices.
Trackbacks/Pingbacks