Day 059 - 01 Dec 94 - Page 67


     
     1   Q.   It is "NBC Communications", an extract from the Advertising
     2        Standards Authority.
     3
     4   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  You want the McDonald's Restaurants one in
     5        the middle.
     6
     7   MR. MORRIS:  Yes, the second one.
     8        A.  Right.
     9
    10   Q.   If I could just read out a bit of it. It has the headline:
    11        "Go Green McDonald's and the Environment." I cannot
    12        remember what year it was.  It has cropped up before.  "Why
    13        do we continue to use foam cartons when paper could be used
    14        instead?  Foam packaging is more energy efficient to
    15        produce than paper or cardboard in terms of protecting the
    16        environment and conserving energy.  It is also fully
    17        recyclable, unlike paper used with food which is coated
    18        with plastic, wax or silicone.  Such papers are also not
    19        biodegradable.  McDonald's prides itself on being an
    20        industry leader and a responsible community citizen and its
    21        stance on important environmental concerns, such as
    22        managing solid waste, is great."   Then the advertisement
    23        invites readers to write for details "of our recycling
    24        programme".
    25        A.  Yes.
    26
    27   Q.   You use the word "recyclable" to describe your foam
    28        packaging in an advertisement and point (B) of the
    29        complaint being upheld -- sorry ----
    30
    31   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Why not just let Mr. Oakley read it for
    32        himself.  He can then take as much time as he wants to.
    33        A.  OK.
    34
    35   MR. MORRIS:  My understanding is that the claims about any of
    36        your packaging being recyclable in the Advertising
    37        Standards Authority opinion, their misleadingness is
    38        dependent on whether or not you are doing your own
    39        recycling programme which you have advertised that readers
    40        could write to you about.  They said, effectively, you were
    41        not conducting a recycling programme, therefore, you were
    42        misleading readers about your materials being recyclable,
    43        "If the advertisements themselves were not engaged in
    44        recycling material".  The question I am going to ask is
    45        this.  We have seen how this so-called Nottingham
    46        experiment, which has been going on for six years?
    47        A. '88, yes.
    48
    49   Q.   Six years?
    50        A.  Not Nottingham. 
    51 
    52   Q.   Has been used in your national leaflets to customers about 
    53        recycling, and in an advertisement which was deemed to be
    54        misleading.  I put it to you that you were using this
    55        so-called experiment as a propaganda exercise.  Is that
    56        right?
    57        A.  That is not correct.  I explained earlier in the
    58        leaflet the "Did you know" leaflet it says "the aim" of the
    59        scheme was to institute a recycling programme.  It did not
    60        say we were recycling.  As far as the "Go Green" advert is

Prev Next Index