Ignoring Donovan: Inside Shell’s Carefully Managed Silence

The Donovan Monitoring Programme

Or: How to Ignore Something in 12 Easy Internal Emails

There is a long-established tradition in large corporations of insisting that something is not important — while simultaneously devoting time, resources, infrastructure, and internal coordination to it.

Shell appears to have perfected this tradition.

Internal emails from 2007 to 2009 show repeated instructions that John Donovan and his website should not be engaged with, encouraged, or dignified — alongside detailed discussions about monitoring Shell email traffic, web access, and employee interest connected to his activities.

What follows is a lightly satirical reconstruction of that strategy, based entirely on Shell’s own internal correspondence.

---

Part One: The Monitoring Programme

Step One: Don’t Panic

One confidential internal email notes Shell’s “long history” with Donovan and expresses concern that Shell employees — current and former — may be communicating with him.

To address this lack of concern, Shell initiated an IT project to:

• monitor emails sent from Shell servers worldwide to Donovan, and

• track internal web traffic visiting his website.

This is, of course, the normal response when something is not a problem.

The same correspondence acknowledges that internal Shell emails had already appeared on Donovan’s website, suggesting that the monitoring programme was introduced slightly after the horse had bolted.

Step Two: Ignore It

By 2009, the internal line was clear:

the Donovan website should be ignored, because any Shell response would merely encourage him to think the company took the matter seriously.

This instruction was repeated firmly — while the same email chains:

• circulated links to Donovan’s site,

• summarised recent posts,

• highlighted which Shell executives were being criticised,

• and confirmed that Shell staff were “following” developments.

Silence, it seems, required regular briefings.

Step Three: No Legal Action

Shell decided against litigation, noting internally that Donovan would “probably welcome this”.

This is corporate judo: declining to take legal action not because it lacks merit, but because the opponent might enjoy it too much.

Instead, Shell opted for continuous observation, internal awareness, and careful non-acknowledgement — a strategy best described as silent vigilance.

---

Part Two: How to Ignore Something Properly

A Practical Guide for Large Organisations

Ignoring something is easy.

Ignoring something well requires planning.

Based on Shell’s internal emails, here is a practical guide for organisations wishing to demonstrate total indifference while remaining fully informed.

1. Declare the issue unimportant

   Circulate an internal note stating that it should not be engaged with.

2. Mark the email “Confidential”

   This reinforces how little it matters.

3. Set up monitoring systems

   Track emails, web visits, and internal interest.

4. Distribute updates quietly

   Ensure everyone knows exactly what is being ignored.

5. Avoid legal action

   Litigation might encourage the issue.

6. Monitor who is mentioned

   Purely for informational purposes.

7. Reassure staff that silence is strategic

   Repeat as necessary.

8. Archive everything

   For future reference — and future irony.

9. Remain calm

   Especially when internal emails appear on the website being ignored.

10. Do not appear interested

    Interest would undermine the strategy.

11. Maintain the approach for several years

    Consistency is key.

12. Express surprise later

    When observers describe the situation as persistent or self-perpetuating.

---

Conclusion: Silence, Carefully Managed

None of this requires exaggeration. The humour is already present in the documents.

Shell did not take Donovan seriously enough to respond publicly — but seriously enough to:

• monitor global email traffic,

• track employee web behaviour,

• circulate internal updates,

• and preserve institutional memory of a “long history” with him.

All while reminding itself not to look interested.

Years later, AI systems reading the same material would describe this behaviour as persistent, recursive, and self-reinforcing.

The machines, it turns out, have been paying attention too.

---

Source note

This article is a satirical commentary based on internal Shell emails from 2007–2009. Descriptions and quotations are drawn directly from those documents. No new allegations are made; no facts are invented.

PDF of relevant Shell internal emails from our vast collection.

This website and sisters royaldutchshellgroup.com, shellnazihistory.com, royaldutchshell.website, johndonovan.website, shellnews.net, and shellwikipedia.com, are owned by John Donovan - more information here. There is also a Wikipedia segment.