Day 012 - 18 Jul 94 - Page 48


     
     1        of the content of any particular advertisement.  Under
              your analysis, any McDonald's advertisement that failed to
     2        reflect your negative view of the company's products would
              presumably be considered deceptive.  Even the ingredient
     3        and nutrition disclosure booklets which you commend, would
              have to be withdrawn from Texas.  This unprecedented
     4        attempt to suppress an entire advertising campaign without
              regard to what specific advertisements actually say, is
     5        without foundation in the law and constitutes a blatantly
              unconstitutional attempt to violate McDonald's First
     6        Amendment rights".
 
     7        Mr. Horwitz, so far as you are concerned as an American
              lawyer, is that a correct statement of the position in
     8        law?
              A.  Yes, that is.
     9
         Q.   "Timing.  We also object to the timing of your demand
    10        which came more than three months after the advertising
              campaign began.  However, your letter totally disregards
    11        the lead times involved in national magazine publishing.
              Advertisements must be in the pipeline weeks or even
    12        months before the magazines are scheduled to appear on
              news stands newsstands, a point your letter does not even
    13        acknowledge".  Then I need not bother you with the
              conclusion.
    14
              There is a response on the next page, 164, from
    15        Mr. Gardiner at Texas:
 
    16        "Dear Mr. Califano", dated May 5th 1987, "Attorney General
              Mattox has asked me to respond to your May 4 letter to
    17        him.  The letter is an inadequate response to the concerns
              raised in his April 24th letter.  The print advertisements
    18        at issue are deceptive in a number of ways, in violation
              of the Texas law and demonstrate an intent to deceive
    19        consumers.  Recognising the lead time necessary to pull
              print advertisement, the Attorney General has concluded
    20        that these advertisements must be discontinued.  Please
              confirm McDonald's plans and timetable for discontinuing
    21        use of these advertisements.  Failure to respond may
              result in legal action by this office to force
    22        discontinuance." Did that happen?
              A.  No, we discontinued no advertising.
    23
         Q.   Were you subject of a suit to force you to discontinue by
    24        the State of Texas?
              A.  Yes, we were.
    25
         Q.   What happened? 
    26        A.  We felt that their claims were completely unjustified. 
  
    27   Q.   Did they start proceedings?
              A.  No, they did not.
    28
         Q.   I want you look at one other thing.  You said before lunch
    29        that the terms of the letter to Mr. Abrams were a little
              softer than the terms of the letter to Mr. Gardner.  I am
    30        just looking for what Mr. Mattox had written on 24th
              April.  Can you turn back to page 131?

Prev Next Index