Day 002 - 29 Jun 94 - Page 04

     1   MISS STEEL:  B.  Then you want page 131.
     2   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  6B.
     3   MISS STEEL:  Document 7.  Page 131.
     4   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Yes.
     5   MISS STEEL:  The letter is dated 24th April 1987.  The first
              two paragraphs say:  "The attorneys general of Texas,
     6        California and New York have concluded our joint review of
              McDonald's recent advertising campaign, which said that
     7        McDonald's food is nutritious. Our mutual conclusion is
              that this advertising campaign is deceptive.  We therefore
     8        request that McDonald's immediately cease and desist
              further use of this advertising campaign.
              The reason for this is simple.  McDonald's food is, as a
    10        whole, not nutritious.  The intent and result of the
              current campaign is to deceive customers into believing
    11        the opposite.  Fast food customers often choose to go to
              McDonald's because it is inexpensive and convenient.  They
    12        should not be fooled into eating there because you have
              told them that it is also nutritious".
              As you will hear from the former assistant State Attorney
    14        General of Texas giving evidence on behalf of the
              defendants, in the face of their threat McDonald's
    15        withdrew their advertisement thereby effectively
              recognising that they did not have a leg to stand on.
              In this case McDonald's have asserted that they did not
    17        withdraw the adverts.  They did not intend to deceive the
              public.  As a result of their assertion we asked the
    18        plaintiffs for the documents relating to the intentions of
              their advertising campaign.  They were strangely not
    19        forthcoming.  The ones that we were given following an
              order by the court had very large chunks blanked out.
    20        That was the document I was referring to.
    21        If their document and other documents were at all helpful
              to McDonald's case, I am sure they would have disclosed
    22        the whole of them.  We are saying that they have engaged
              in a massive cover-up, and that this is not surprising
    23        since they have a lot they want to keep hidden.
    24        I now want briefly to go into the issue of publication.
    25   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Yes.
    26   MISS STEEL:  And to explain some of our case.  Interestingly, 
              McDonald's state they were aware of this fact sheet, the 
    27        "What is wrong with McDonald's" fact sheet, for several
              years before they began their action.  The question has to
    28        be asked, "Why?" -- that is, why did they take so long to
              begin their action?  We consider that the answer is
    29        obvious.  Following the criticisms made in the leaflet and
              similar criticisms elsewhere, McDonald's took steps to
    30        polish up their image.

Prev Next Index