faux outrage. they repeated it over and over again on msnbc today.

they also ignore the part where he said:

“He’s frustrated because he cares about the small people, and we care about the small people,” Svanberg said of Obama. “I hear comments that sometimes large oil companies are greedy companies that don’t care. But that is not the case with BP. We care about the small people.”

He was obviously going off something that was said in the meeting about “the little people” and messed up with the language. Like I said earlier, my husband makes little goofs like that all the time.

“A gentle tweak is understandable, but when did it become OK to deride someone’s skill at English as a second language?”

When a liberal does it.

Sarainitaly: The sad truth of this is that phase has been used by everyone-Left, Right and Center. And even by the very folks it was “directed” at/to.

I saw and heard it live and since then I have not be able to understand what the fuss has been all about and why?

Liberals are outraged because Svanberg only committed to helping Midgets affected by the oil spill. Come on- how many Midgets do you think are into shrimping?

YAWN!

@Sara

“When a liberal does it.”

Not even then. When people develop an attitude towards something, like the negativity directed at BP, they tend to try and find anything they can to reaffirm that attitude. It’s largely an unconscious process called the confirmation bias. I think what happened here is that people are so upset with BP (and rightfully so), that they heard his comment and took it to reaffirm their belief that BP does not give the average person any consideration.

I do agree, though. This was clearly a ‘lost in translation’ moment.

As I commented to the thread yesterday like so many other people, I immediately went to a bit of snark about the “small people” phrasing, but I later came to realize in all the hoopla any political advantage President Obama may have gained from being “frustrated because he cares about…”, which one is given the impression contributed to the meeting going longer than expected was lost in the uproar.

Even allowing for a translation error, he still meant the common people, the other, not people who run oil companies. That’s offensive. It is a condescending attitude in any language.

On the other hand, it is not a hanging offense — such as being in charge of a company that causes an environmental disaster, tries to conceal it and then frustrates all offers of help or media attempts to cover it because that might reveal what they are trying to hide.

Cut the breaks for the Brit. Little people, common folk, workers, whatever, it’s still proletariats they are describing and they are still legends and smarter in their own minds. Only a liberal would use “little people’, as in ” I wish to thank the Academy and all the…wait for it…LITTLE PEOPLE.”

Ok, he could have heard the phrase in the meeting, I would believe that given those in attendance, but using it to describe how much they care is stupid or elitist…and I doubt the Brit is stupid. I for one am sick of the incompetent and delusional Big People. November will be the election for little people who can handle big jobs.

I agree with this topic. The whole world must think we are batshit crazy.
A man comes over here and gives us 20 billion dollars and a heartfelt public apology and all we can do is beat him up over some kind of ‘lost in translation’ crap.

I’m embarrassed.

I thought that the vp & pres had discussed this (microphone on) – “trickey-dickey’ would have loved it!

Tommy Christopher doesn’t qualify as a “small” person..IYKWIMAITTYD

“Small people” is a nearly literal translation of a fairly common Swedish expression, best translated as “the exposed people” or “the vulnerable people,” when used in this context. It describes people who are affected by something that encompasses them and is beyond their control.

I’m Swedish, so I’m judging from how the nearly literal translation comes across when used in this context in Swedish (the expression “den lilla människan”).

Swedish politicians and media sometimes use this expression when talking about political decisions that have large effects, discussing how individual people are exposed to these large effects, and talking about the fact that the politicians are responsible.

I’m sure Svanberg tried to convey that BP is aware that the spill has had huge effects on people’s entire environment. These people are encompassed, surrounded by all these huge, devastating effects. In this way they are exposed and vulnerable. And BP is responsible, and mustn’t shy away from responsibility.

That’s how it comes across in Swedish.

But I don’t understand why BP isn’t explaining this, using more or less these words. Surely they can afford a professional translator or interpreter who could explain.

This is so typical.

Small minded people seem to always feign outrage whever anyone they don’t like mentions anyone about anything “small”.

Think about it. Maybe, deep down, it’s really just a ~p**** envy~ sort of thing.

That would help to explain that!

Or, maybe it’s just because they can’t find anything else to be “outraged” about, since they’ve all agreed that they can’t bring up O-Bumble’s inexperience and incompetence (again).

Speaking for myself, the “small” sounded like a sour note in a much larger symphony. It just stood out and no matter under what circumstances it was uttered or by whom, I don’t think it would’ve escaped notice. Sure, it does feed into the whole “big, powerful company narrative”, but quite literally, it comes across a belittling the victims.

This is not a liberal/conservative thing. It is not a translation problem. It is not a sign of arrogance or ignorance on the part of BP. It comes down to one of those moments that the media seizes on and tries to make everyone believe is important so that they, the media, can beat their chest and convince the viewers that they are one their side. In other words, it is all about ratings. The words used are irrelevant and will be ignored by anyone with a true interest in what transpired in the meeting that preceded the statement. This is not where the newsworthy moment lies. Get over it.

Let zem eet CAKE!

Seriously, it’s certain that this fellow meant his comment to be conciliatory.

If Americans could develop a wider worldview – a better understanding of international communities and cultures – misunderstandings like this would be rarer.

I doubt FakesNews expressed outrage about this incident. They’re too busy counting the big hush-money/airtime buys BP is making to soften up the media

“Tommy Christopher doesn’t qualify as a “small” person.”

At least HIS fat isn’t between his EARS.

You’re a bigot . . . and a creep.

This was never a big (no pun intended) deal to me, and I understand the language issue. Besides, we have Joe Barton who apologized to BP for what we, the Americans, have done to ‘shakedown’ BP. That BP that has decimated a $234 billion annual economy, destroyed the Gulf, killed countless wildlife, mangled the livelihood of hundreds of thousands of people, ruined tourism. This translation issue, in comparison, is ‘small’ indeed. Only idiots, fools and Republicans would apologize to BP. Who will they apologize to next, Saddam? Hitler? Kim Jong dumbass?