Day 002 - 29 Jun 94 - Page 43


     
     1        avoid the subject.  What there is really is a matter of
              fair comment, saying that exploited groups in our society
     2        or disadvantaged groups in our society, already
              disadvantaged, have less job opportunities.  For example,
     3        women and black people generally have less job
              opportunities.  Therefore, jobs with worst conditions or
     4        lower pay are the ones which predominantly employ a
              greater percentage of women and black people.
     5
              So, in fact, we are saying the opposite from what
     6        McDonald's are saying we are saying.  They do, of course,
              employ a lot of women and black people, and maybe they do
     7        have a terrific training programming -- I do not know --
              but that is not the point.  The point is that low pay is
     8        possible because there are people that are willing to work
              for low pay.  People who are willing to work for low pay
     9        are willing only because there are no alternatives.  The
              people that have the less alternatives are disadvantaged
    10        groups, such as women and black people, working class
              people in general of course, and young people leaving
    11        school.
 
    12        I think I have made the point -- the last box there:
              "Everything must go".  "What's wrong with McDonald's is
    13        also wrong with all the junk-food chains" is a good
              summary, really, of the motivation of the leaflet, the
    14        motivation of the person that wrote the fact sheet,
              because it does summarise the point, and also that it is
    15        not really McDonald's that is solely responsible or even
              especially responsible.
    16
              It is an example of a general problem that people have a
    17        right to criticise and to focus on. If the leaflet was
              criticising Volkswagen or -- I do not know anything about
    18        cars -- a big car company for the damage cars do; it does
              not mean to say that it is vindictive, or whatever.  It
    19        just means you focus on one in order to concentrate your
              thoughts.
    20
              The person that wrote this leaflet, as far as we can see,
    21        was making general points about something that affects all
              the public, about consuming and working in the fastfood
    22        industry and animals and all those points.  But in order
              to concentrate that person's mind, they really focused on
    23        McDonald's as the most high profile example.  So, really
              McDonald's, as I said before, set themselves up through
    24        their fantastic advertising budget, the astronomical
              advertising budget, and high profile.  They cannot really
    25        complain when people focus on them in their criticisms of
              society. 
    26 
              The last page again, Mr. Rampton said it was not really 
    27        important, except for a couple respects but it is
              important in terms of motive.  Is the motive destruction
    28        of McDonald's just for the sake of it?  Is the motive to
              stir up controversy?  Is the motive to disorganise
    29        society, as Mr. Rampton seemed to imply?  The motive
              really is to put over constructive alternatives about the
    30        type of food we eat, how we share our food, how we make
              it, how our high streets can look, the environment and

Prev Next Index