It was Britain’s favourite Briton (according to TV polls at least) who declaimed that faced with a crisis, one should make the best out of it. For lots of people the week that Ever Given spent stuck in Suez was just that, an opportunity to speak, to spout, opine and editorialise.
The coverage was huge, not least because after 12 months with little to discuss but COVID, the risk of your new patio furniture not arriving was meat and drink to even the most jaded of editors.
I’m not sure that all the commentary added much to the sum of human knowledge, though it was fun watching the engineers growl as the news media incorrectly identified the ship type, speculated as to the likely causes and commented on the actual situation. But then, as their T-shirts almost say, it’s what they are there for.
It was good, albeit in a bizarre way to see shipping front and centre of the news agenda, trending on social media and subject to the kind of analysis that is usually reserved for celebrities.
It showed a lot of very good things about the industry and I couldn’t help wondering about half way through the week whether the grounding was simply a ploy to secure shipping the attention which it spends all its time saying it deserves, but never gets?
If so, it was a masterstroke, nailing once and for all for consumers where our stuff comes from and the supply chain it depends on.
So, can shipping capitalise on the attention and remain in the news? Probably not. The trouble is twofold. Shipping has been too good at hiding from scrutiny where it really matters and secondly, to misquote Paul Simon, bad news runs the game.
The last time shipping made the cut in the Financial Times for example, it was either because of the continuing lack of tests, vaccinations and shift changes for crew members or because of port disruptions on the US West Coast.
Oil price hikes might get your flicker if one of the big tanker owners is game for some comment and of course Big Blue’s results (and views on any number of things) are used as a proxy for the container sector.
There are too few companies that any editors have heard of to make shipping count in news terms. There are too few listed companies to make it a properly tradable sector (itself possibly a good thing) and there are too few charterers prepared to talk about shipping and how it could be better.
This is changing to some extent, as the bigger charterers realise that their ESG credentials rest on their supply chain as much as their own performance. Soon it will only be possible to raise finance on reasonable terms if you can demonstrate those credentials and that your suppliers are playing their part too.
Instead, taking the above mentions as an example, it illustrates the truth that shipping is going to have to face if it wants its place in the news agenda; new narratives are needed and the increased scrutiny that results from transparency can be an uncomfortable place to be. All of those will be blown out of the water by a good old fashioned accident.
Should the canal be dredged, can supply chains be designed to be more robust, will air freight’s share grow, will carriers finally adopt freight derivatives? With things returning to normal, these are just some of the stories that won’t interest editors strongly in the near future.
Interesting to us perhaps, but hardly front page news. And it still wouldn’t satisfy the industry voices who think that many of their problems would be solved if they could just get a bit more coverage.
The pandemic and its aftermath, financial markets (and tech in particular), politics local, national and international, decarbonisation and the energy transition. These are the stories that keep on giving rather than ‘industry goes back to working well behind the scenes’.
If it wants more coverage, for now at least, shipping will have to take its place in a long queue, something with which it is already familiar. And as for the positive PR aspects, well when the next segment producer calls or tweets me, at least I know which experts to call when I need some insight on shipping.
Your piece needs some editing.
That’s a bit harsh on the FT. It regularly produces good pieces on shipping, admittedly generally with a focus on its role in globalisation and maintaining international supply chains, but that’s part of its core remit. It does also include shipping in its coverage of environmental issues. The writing is always excellent and brings a fresh perspective… and, no, I do not write for them ….
I’m a subscriber so I rate them highly. Just one example and the most relevant as they cover ‘business’ – the point is they have a lot of ground to cover – not how they do it. Their work on the grounding and its implications was excellent.
I’m going to inject some American optimism into the field of British cynicism (perhaps afterwards I will need to click my ruby slippers three times) but I really feel we have an opportunity here to follow up this event with the positive aspects of our industry. You know those wind farms that are making noise in Newsland??? How do they get built?? What about the platform that Elon Musk is using to recover his spaceships??? And while we haven’t seen them in awhile, let’s not forget about those floating cities we call cruise ships?? They will be back!!
If we do nothing, we get what we deserve! To quote Simon and Garfunkel: “The Sound of Silence”!
Ever Given has already been forgotten by the mass public (maybe it will be renamed ‘Ever FORgiven’).
As pointed out, the general understanding of shipping and maritime by consumers and by bankers/ financiers is so staggeringly poor that, without sea birds and wildlife being impacted or without BMW motorcycles washing up on the beach then there is ‘nothing to see here’.
Shipping commentators keep on moaning about a lack of publicity but, when push comes to shove, shipping is more than happy to plod its quiet little path in glorious anonymity.