Saying "ethical PR firm" is similar to saying "moral criminal".   The job of a PR company is to make the client look good using whatever they can get their hands on. It is up to the client to reject whatever does not fit their ethical viewpoint. Since the client in this case obviously accepted BP's proposals, it is they who should be attacked for the result. The focus appear, in other words, to be shifting from the real culprits. 

The fact that BP apologised is just more spin and meaningless, just protecting their clientbase.  If a weapons mfr sell a missile that is used by a client to commit genocide who ends up being charged with the war crime?  
Let's get real and focus on boycotting businesses owned by the Zuptapire.