If you are a member of the Board of Directors of the the National Fish and Wildlife Foundation and BP says "We wouldn’t dream of profiting from this terrible disaster,” would you take the money (estimated to be valued at $20 million generated from the sale of oil "salvaged" from the broken well)?
Now, if I am a BP shareholder or board member, I might also be asking why BP wasn't just keeping the money. Is it really wrong for a company in the business of drilling and selling oil to, well, sell oil? I'm not generally thinking it is wrong and think it's what everyone would expect BP to do. Again, this is their core business.
But for probably PR reasons, BP feels moved to give this income away and likely reap a healthy tax deduction to boot. Meanwhile, the Foundation Board has said it will take the money and go do good things with it.
Should we applaud? Isn't BP just doing more PR and taking advantage of the Foundation's image and name? Doesn't the Foundation loose credibility in taking the money -- the sold-out syndrome? Or is it true, that as long as mission is not compromised, the only thing wrong with tainted money is there taint enough of it?