Day 186 - 10 Nov 95 - Page 26
1 be, quite clear and noted.
2
3 MS. STEEL: If I just say, in terms of the nutrition guide,
4 I do not actually think that the leaflet does say that it
5 is a deliberate attempt at deceit.
6
7 My main concern with the proposal is "the very real risk
8 that you will suffer cancer of the breast and bowel or
9 heart disease". I really do not think that the words
10 about "a diet being high in fat", etcetera, "is linked with
11 cancers of the breast and bowel and heart disease" would be
12 taken by the reasonable reader to mean that you have a very
13 real risk that you are going to suffer those diseases.
14
15 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I understand that. You say that you do not
16 get a very real risk from the text.
17
18 MS. STEEL: Yes.
19
20 MR. JUSTICE BELL: You say it is the text which the ordinary
21 reasonable reader would be looking at and not the arches or
22 the headline to the text or the cartoon. If something like
23 very real risk is to be part of the meaning, then it can
24 only be by virtue of arches headline and/or cartoon; and
25 you say: No, the ordinary reasonable reader would read the
26 text, and those other matters would fall out of his
27 consciousness when he got the meaning. That is really what
28 you are saying, is it not?
29
30 MS. STEEL: Yes, except I am not quite sure about this bit
31 about the headline, "What's so unhealthy about McDonald's
32 food?" Is that the one you are referring to?
33
34 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes.
35
36 MS. STEEL: I put that in a slightly different category to
37 the -----
38
39 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I appreciate you do.
40
41 MS. STEEL: Because it is saying that the food is unhealthy,
42 but it is basically not adding anything to the point for
43 the reason it is unhealthy.
44
45 MR. JUSTICE BELL: No.
46
47 MS. STEEL: It is for the reasons given in the paragraph.
48
49 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes, I understand that.
50
51 MS. STEEL: Just to come back to this bit about the arches.
52 I think when Mr. Morris was speaking you said something
53 about: "Is there anything else in the leaflet that refers
54 to cancer?" I just wanted to make one point, which is that
55 -- I did say this before -- I do not think that people are
56 going to look at the individual headings and then look for
57 the relevant part in the leaflet. As the Plaintiffs have
58 pleaded in their case, as they have set out the leaflet, it
59 is: "What's wrong with McDonald's? Everything they don't
60 want you to know". Then the entire arches one after the
