May proved to be quite an eventful month –aside from the series finale of “Lost.” Nashville experienced a devastating flood that lacked initial media coverage due to another disaster: the oil spill on the Gulf of Mexico.

Facebook profile updates and tweets were littered with an outpouring of disbelief and condolence for the flood, and some more ominous and vague messages about the oil spill.

The consensus seemed to be: Boycott B.P.

Sure enough, conversations fueled by “Natty Light” began to emerge with the same sentiment. It’s no secret that the college-aged demographic likes things fast. Sometimes this is beneficial,  since who can argue the genius of the Hot-N-Ready Pizza?

But there are some more serious issues. The devil is in the details. Details that can get lost in the midst of generalized ideas masquerading as researched opinion.

With a flood, the semantics are clear: too much water, too fast. An oil spill cannot be understood in such elementary terms. This is where things begin to get murky. And without care, users who don’t follow up on information they’re given can unknowingly perpetuate half-truths.

Several months back, Facebook, Twitter and text-message users caused a near hysteria when news circulated that gas prices would be sky-rocketing. This led to many people rushing to their SUVs in a mad dash for the local gas station. While the “Blame B.P.” mentality has a more concrete origin, this is just as dangerous.

Is B.P. to blame? Well, as it turns out, yes.

At least on the surface of the issue, which is about the depth of a Tweet or Facebook update hurriedly typed. The real issue is the ease with which some young people are willing to support a cause or idea simply because their peers are doing the same. It is our responsibility to form opinions based on facts which have been gathered from reputable sources.

Those who use words like “sux” and “OMG” don’t count.

Scapegoats are adored by the American people, raised to the level of popular fame only rivaled by Chuck Norris and reality television. They have the ability to alleviate the pressure of an issue that’s becoming too difficult to understand. If we have someone to blame, then it’s “their” responsibility, and we can return to “Keeping Up with the Kardashians.”

Here are the facts.

On April 20, an oil well situated nearly 5,000 feet below the ocean’s surface began to leak. The well was being operated on behalf of B.P., and the corporation was slow to admit guilt. This, coupled with the need to find someone to blame, led to the public outrage at the petroleum company.

The immediate effects of the oil spill are tremendous: marine life threatened, fisherman out of commission and a crushing blow to Gulf tourism are just a few. As thousands of gallons of crude oil continue to spill out into the ocean, solutions are not arising fast enough.

The proverbial Band-Aid was a dome, implemented by B.P., which attempted to cease the flow of oil. Like Mary Poppins, but not nearly as earnest, B.P. has been pulling all sorts of fixes out of its corporate goody bag. There have been insertion tubes, mud packing devices, and yes, even robots. Not even a few months in and this is already sounding like the plot of a bad Bruce Willis movie.

While we should hold the corporation accountable for its carelessness, it is imperative that doesn’t become a diversion from the core issue. Corporate greed is nothing new, and frankly, B.P. drilling oil without a contingency plan shouldn’t shock anyone.

Nor should the involvement of the Halliburton Company.

The company, made famous by Dick Cheney’s involvement, completed the cemented structure that burst in the oil spill a mere 20 hours before the disaster happened. Also being brought into the finger-pointing game is Transocean, the company that owned the Deepwater Horizon oil rig involved in the spill.

Offshore drilling is done by many corporations at depths that, like the current oil spill, cannot be contained, should the oil begin to leak. By using social networking sites to post messages about boycotting one specific oil company, we are ignoring the fact that every other oil company is breathing collective sighs of relief that it wasn’t them. B.P. issuing out grants and attempting cleanup is like a vandal arriving with a paint roller in hand to cover up graffiti they drew, and I’m not suggesting it be congratulated on its efforts.

What I am suggesting, is that we, as a young and educated generation, owe it to ourselves to look at issues that affect our environment and society with more scrutiny. Boycotting a company that acted in a grossly irresponsible way is not a bad thing; it’s just not the only thing we have to contribute to the disaster.

It’s not enough for just a fraction of the corporate suits to be shaking in their Prada loafers; the whole gang should be held accountable. We can do it. After the iPad, anything is possible.

– Krystal Wallace is a senior journalism major at Middle Tennessee State U.